Resolution criteria
This market will resolve “YES” if Trump or his administration takes any direct action such as threats, bribery, pressure, intimidation intended to interfere with Greenland's governance. This must be done directly through the government of Greenland itself or formal/informal visits to Greenland intended to acquire land or to intimidate.
Background
Trump has renewed calls for U.S. annexation of Greenland following public comments from Trump and the wife of top adviser Stephen Miller. Trump has previously refused to rule out the use of military or economic force to take Greenland. In a 45-minute phone conversation with Danish PM Frederiksen, Trump stated there is reason to believe he is serious in his statements about his increasing interest in Greenland.
Considerations (Denmark)
As Denmark owns Greenland, territorial integrity must be respected. Any actions taken by Trump that affects Denmark’s economy would have a knock-on financial effect on Greenland. Any such actions implemented or the use of military methods would also resolve in “YES”
: Additional non-kinetic actions that would result in YES resolution (Must be done by Trump or his administration):
Media Manipulation: Use of propaganda, disinformation, and control of media narratives that prove to change the opinions of the people of Greenland
Social & Psychological Influence: Targeting the beliefs, emotions, and behaviours of Greenland's population
Economic Coercion against Greenland or Denmark: Disruption of communication networks, power grids, and financial systems including the use of tariffs/sanctions
Any deal imposed on Greenland that upsets the Greenlanders/Government would resolve YES as that constitutes interference
The creator will prioritize statements from the government of Greenland when evaluating resolution
The creator has reiterated that threats through other countries are not in line with the markets purpose. The market focuses on Trump's DIRECT interference with the government of GREENLAND itself, which would require:
A formal meeting including confirmation from the Greenland government that threats were made or intimidation was caused.
A casual/formal visit to Greenland which the government states was an intimidation/a threat.
Direct phone calls to Greenland's leader which causes uproar
Letters/emails..
1,000People are also trading
Hello everyone! I have always reiterated that this market was created for the interference with Greenland itself and not through other countries. Upon reading my description over and over I understand this is quite confusing. I generated the description of this market at the start soley with the use of the apps AI feature and admit I should have read more carefully before posting as the AI was even contradicting itself! Please do not sell out yet or give up on this market as you bought into this it is my duty to fix this for you. I will now take up my responsibility and edit this market which will also include taking out irrelevant or repeated info to make this easier for you but please do not worry - I have taken screenshots of the original which I will release upon request. I will clarify as much as I can to make things crystal clear. EVERYONE has the opportunity to object/request a change or further clarification. I also acknowledge that the tariffs on Greenland further complicated things however, there is a reason why I took this action which will be clearly stated as I better the description. Nothing will be changed - only clarified. Thanks for your patience. Please come back a little later to have a read over it and let me know what you think. Thanks for your patience on this
@Quroe @Emanuele1000 @AhronMaline @moobunny @MattP @Waterfalls @SaiVazquez Hello everyone, thanks for sharing these new developments and most importantly your views. Trump is making my life very hard at the moment! Tariffs were just an example of a resolution, there is other criteria which would resolve “Yes” as stated above. I set the ending date on this market to December 31st so there is still plenty of time for development and clarity as we still do not know enough about what was agreed upon if anything. I will of course end this market early if there is reason. Any “deal” that has been proven to be carried out that goes against the territorial integrity of Denmark/Greenland, or ANY deal that is imposed on Greenland which upsets the Greenlanders/Government should definitely resolve in “Yes” as that is interfering.
Trump proves to be an unreliable source. so maybe we should listen more to what the Danish/Greenland government have to say. What do you all think of this?
@Gemc My biggest concern with this market is that the threat of using any kind of pressure is itself a kind of interference, and remains so even if, say, Trump realizes that it’s not having the intended effect and backs down. If I walk up to you and say, give me your wallet, I have a gun, that’s a crime regardless of whether I get your wallet or indeed whether I have a gun. Of course, there’s a large gray area and you have to draw a line in the sand.
@moobunny I second this. This is a gray area that could cause some discord in the market -- we want to avoid a situation where we disagree on what we are trading on.
@moobunny @Quroe Hi and thanks for sharing this, your feedback is very useful to me. Prior to creating this market, Trump had already been making threats, including tariffs. I think that when Trump gave the date of February 1st to implement the tariffs this market shot up. To be honest, the description may also have confused this as it was originally generated via AI. Neither Trump nor his team have had a formal meeting nor have they visited Greenland yet to attempt a negotiation, most of the threats have been through other countries and I did state - ‼️This market is aimed at Trump's direct interference through the government of Greenland itself, not interference through other countries ‼️.
I added sanctions/tariffs against Denmark as this would affect their economy, which may have a knock-on effect on their ability to keep Greenland, which could force them to sell a part to Trump to save their economy.
Everything else still applies - Trumps DIRECT interference with the government of GREENLAND, as this is what the market is about. In order to do that, Trump would need to phone the leader with threats/visit the country/create some propaganda channel (as they do in russia) to change the mindset of Greenlanders. Again sorry, I think that the expected tariffs against Denmark may have sidetracked the intentions of the market. Hope that clarifies things? Please let me know if there are any issues.
I am 70% sure that if tariffs were to positively resolve the market, then what was obtained in exchange for their abolition should also positively resolve the market, which, as far as I understand, is the cession of part of the territory and the obligation for the government to sign economic and trade agreements.
@Emanuele1000 IMO cessation of territory within Greenland should count if confirmed, because that amounts to seizing that territory via coercive threats. But if it was only financial concessions or agreements on usage, then IMO it shouldn't count, because "interfering with Greenland" was the threat used to get those concessions but was never carried out
@AhronMaline I get the sense he got scared after seeing the stock market dip and compromised. No idea how that should count for this market.
@MattP Ah, true, to this percentage we must add the probability that Trump is lying, which lately is like flipping a coin lol Now I also understand why the market has fallen so much.
@MattP https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c86vvjxe9z7o
The Danish and Greenlandic reiteration that sovereignty is non-negotiable appears to be aimed at rejecting reports in the New York Times, where anonymous officials said one idea under discussion was for Denmark to cede sovereignty over small areas of Greenland where the US would build military bases.
So NYT reported that they might cede sovereignty over land for military bases, and BBC is skeptical. In short, who the fuck knows.
@moobunny I love the triple ambiguity of what the actual state of negotiations are, whether Trump and other figures in his administration are misrepresenting it, and how the market creator will interpret whatever happens 😂
if you want to predict correctly, always assume Trump is lying until proven otherwise
Let's leave this a little longer to see if there are any new developments, not the same old comments as before I created this market but I would like to emphasise that if Trump does go ahead with putting sanctions/ tariffs on Denmark on February the 1st then I will resolve yes. Trump is a complex man, which has made this market a complex one. Please let me know if you have any objections as you have invested into this I would like you to all have a positive experience and feel that you have been treated fairly
@WilliamGunn he announced tarriffs but didn't yet implement them, and in the past he's often backed down from such announcements
@Gemc I enjoy helping markets run smoothly. Let me know if I ever overstep your authority -- I don't want to be the one running your market.
@AhronMaline I second this. This is exactly how I interpret how this is being run.
@Quroe Honestly, you are not overstepping in any way. There are a lot of people in this market so it is really helpful to have your comments and opinions. Thank you so much.
@AhronMaline I fully agree too