U.S. President Donald Trump announced that he has reached a "framework for a future agreement" on the issue of Greenland.

This statement, released on Wednesday, January 21, came as a surprise because tensions between the U.S. and its NATO ally Denmark had been escalating in recent days, even weeks, with Trump even threatening to use force to seize Denmark's semi-autonomous territory.

What might this agreement include? And will Denmark and Greenland accept it? Both have clearly stated that they will not give up their sovereignty over the world's largest island.

What Are the Positions of the Parties on the Framework?

Trump made the announcement after a meeting at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.

He said on "Truth Social": "Based on our very productive meeting with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, we have developed a framework for a future agreement on the issue of Greenland."

He did not provide details but said negotiations would continue until an agreement is reached.

Rutte said that during his conversation with Trump, the issue of Danish sovereignty over Greenland was not discussed.

Prime Minister of Denmark, Mette Frederiksen, said that Danes can discuss anything, but "our sovereignty cannot be negotiated."

The Prime Minister of Greenland also echoed Frederiksen, stating that sovereignty is a "red line." Notably, Jens-Frederik Nielsen said he was not aware of the specific details of the agreement being discussed.

Are There Any Details? What Are the Options?

The New York Times cited anonymous officials who said one option was for Denmark to relinquish sovereignty over a small part of Greenland to allow the U.S. to build a military base.

This kind of arrangement is similar to the two bases that the UK maintains in Cyprus, which have been in place since Cyprus' independence in 1960.

However, it remains unclear how this model would apply if both Denmark and Greenland refuse to give up any sovereignty.

One of the reasons Trump has advocated for taking over Greenland is the threat posed by Russian and Chinese ships near the island, although Denmark claims there is currently no such threat.

In response to U.S. concerns, NATO allies have tried to reassure the U.S., stating that they will strengthen security in the Arctic region, and Rutte said that the framework also requires NATO to contribute in this regard.

On Thursday, he said, "I have no doubt that we can do this soon. I hope it will be by 2026, and even earlier in 2026."

British Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper said that the UK has called for the establishment of a "Arctic Sentinel" mission, similar to NATO's "Baltic Sentinel," which is a mission to enhance maritime surveillance.

Would Trump Be Satisfied With a Non-Sovereignty Agreement?

Under a 1951 agreement with Denmark, the U.S. can station any size military force in Greenland. Currently, more than 100 military personnel are stationed at the Pituffik Base in northern Greenland.

Therefore, the negotiations may focus on renegotiating this agreement, according to U.S. officials.

Nevertheless, the entire negotiation is overshadowed by Trump's insistence on "owning" Greenland.

To fulfill Trump's desire, it would not only have to cross the sovereignty red lines of Greenland and Denmark, but also find a way to overcome the provision in Greenland's constitution that "prohibits the sale of land."

One possible model is the U.S. military base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba - since 1903, the U.S. has completely controlled the area through a sort of "permanent lease."

It remains unclear whether Trump's sudden change of heart at the Davos forum, abandoning the threat of military action to annex Greenland, was due to these considerations, and Trump's move has relieved his NATO allies.

The core principle of NATO, established in 1949, is: any external attack on an ally is an attack on all allies. Denmark has clearly stated that if allies launch military attacks against each other, the transatlantic alliance would collapse immediately, and the U.S. is a major member of NATO.

Immediately after meeting with Rutte, Trump announced the "framework," which raised some concerns among Greenland, as they felt that discussions about the future of Greenland were taking place without their involvement.

On Thursday, Greenland's foreign minister, Vivian Motzfeldt, said that her government had not asked Rutte to "negotiate on their behalf," but rather to "directly convey the red line to Trump."

Rutte did not confirm whether this was the case.

He has also recently faced criticism for his frequent praise of Trump.

Why Does Trump Want Greenland? For Its Minerals?

Trump said that Greenland is crucial for his plan to build a "Golden Dome" defense system, which aims to protect the U.S. from missile attacks by Russia and China, and he also said that European allies could participate in the plan.

Greenland has rich and undeveloped reserves of rare earth minerals, which are essential for technologies including mobile phones and electric vehicles.

Trump did not directly state that the U.S. covets Greenland's mineral deposits, but he said that controlling Greenland would put "everyone in a very favorable position, especially in terms of security and minerals."

Source: BBC

Original: toutiao.com/article/7598615081328443955/

Statement: This article represents the views of the author.