Will the US take control of any part of Greenland?

The strongest evidence is the September 22 security agreement, which explicitly preserves Danish sovereignty while expanding U.S. military access. That is exactly the kind of outcome that satisfies U.S. strategic interests without requiring a territorial transfer, and it makes a formal acquisition of any part of Greenland before the deadline highly improbable. To get to a Yes, there would need to be a dramatic political reversal in Denmark and Greenland, plus a legally recognized transfer of sovereignty or territory, all within a very short window. That is an exceptionally high bar, especially given the public statements from Danish and Greenlandic leaders rejecting such an outcome.

Trump’s prior rhetoric about wanting to possess Greenland does keep the tail risk alive, but rhetoric is much easier than actual acquisition. The new deal also suggests the preferred path is influence through defense arrangements rather than ownership, which is much more realistic and already underway. Even if the agreement requires parliamentary follow-through, implementation details would still most likely reinforce access rights rather than convert them into territorial control. In practical terms, the last meaningful public development moved the probability further away from a Yes, not closer.

The current market price of 3.1% looks slightly high relative to the legal and political obstacles, though not absurdly so because prediction markets may be pricing in definitional ambiguity around “control” or “acquire.” If the market is treating expanded defense zones or base rights as a possible Yes, that helps explain the residual price. But for a true acquisition of any part of Greenland, I think the market is still overestimating the chance by a bit, because the latest concrete action is a direct negative signal on sovereignty transfer.