From Grok:

Neither side is inventing the treaty text; they are spinning the same document in opposite directions.

Trump’s claim of “permanent control over security and all other needs” is an overstatement. The agreement keeps Danish sovereignty and Greenland’s self-determination on paper, requires mutual agreement on implementation details for extra bases, and does not transfer ownership or give the US a blank check to do whatever it wants.

Denmark’s claim that the deal simply “acknowledges and respects” sovereignty and is just a stronger NATO arrangement understates the substance. The pact is open-ended, binds a future independent Greenland, locks in two additional US bases plus easier procedures for more sites, gives the US broad movement rights including undersea access, and creates an effective US veto on non-NATO military presence and on sensitive investments from countries outside NATO/EU. Those are real new constraints that go beyond the 1951 arrangement.

The gap is political framing after months of US pressure, not a hidden second treaty. Trump maximized the security win; Frederiksen maximized the “we kept the kingdom intact” line. The legal text sits between those two pitches.