By GEIR MOULSON, Associated Press

U.S., Danish and Greenlandic officials have met face to face to discuss President Donald Trump’s ambitions to take control of Greenland, a semiautonomous territory of Denmark. At the same time, Denmark and several European allies are sending troops to Greenland in a pointed signal of intent to boost the vast Arctic island’s security.

Danish Foreign Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen said after a meeting in Washington on Wednesday with his Greenlandic counterpart, U.S. President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio that a “fundamental disagreement” remained. He acknowledged that “we didn’t manage to change the American position” but said he hadn’t expected to.

Denmark’s Foreign Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen and Greenland’s Foreign Minister Vivian Motzfeldt speak at a news conference at the Embassy of Denmark, Wednesday, Jan. 14, 2026, in Washington. (AP Photo/John McDonnell)

However, Wednesday’s events did point to ways ahead.

Searching for a compromise

Denmark, Greenland and the U.S. agreed to form a high-level working group “to explore if we can find a common way forward,” Løkke Rasmussen said. He added that he expects the group to hold its first meeting “within a matter of weeks.”

Related Articles

Today in History: January 15, ‘Great Molasses Flood’ kills 21

Free Starlink access for Iran seen as game changer for demonstrators getting their message out

Trump claims killing of Iran protesters ‘has stopped’ even as Tehran signals executions ahead

Sales of a powerful Nvidia AI chip to China gets the greenlight, with conditions

Venezuela’s acting president vows to continue releasing prisoners detained under Maduro

Danish and Greenlandic officials didn’t specify who would be part of the group or give other details. Løkke Rasmussen said the group should focus on how to address U.S. security concerns while respecting Denmark’s “red lines.” The two countries are NATO allies.

“Whether that is doable, I don’t know,” he added, holding out hope that the exercise could “take down the temperature.”

He wouldn’t elaborate on what a compromise might look like, and expectations are low. As Danish Defense Minister Troels Lund Poulsen put it Thursday, having the group is better than having no working group and “it’s a step in the right direction.” It will at least allow the two sides to talk with each other rather than about each other.

Trump has argued repeatedly that the U.S. needs control of Greenland for its national security. He has sought to justify his calls for a U.S. takeover by repeatedly claiming that China and Russia have their own designs on Greenland, which holds vast untapped reserves of critical minerals.

Sending a military signal

Just as the talks were taking place in Washington on Wednesday, the Danish Defense Ministry announced that it was increasing its military presence in Greenland, along with NATO allies. France, Germany, Norway and Sweden announced that they were each sending very small numbers of troops in a symbolic but pointed move signaling solidarity with Copenhagen.

An Airbus A400M transport aircraft of the German Air Force taxis over the grounds at Wunstorf Air Base in the Hanover region, Germany, Thursday, Jan. 15, 2026 as troops from NATO countries, including France and Germany, are arriving in Greenland to boost security. (Moritz Frankenberg/dpa via AP)

The U.K. said one British officer was part of what it called a reconnaissance group for an Arctic endurance exercise. The German Defense Ministry, which dispatched 13 troops, said the aim is to sound out “possibilities to ensure security with a view to Russian and Chinese threats in the Arctic.” It said it was sending them on a joint flight from Denmark as “a strong signal of our unity.”

Poulsen said that “the Danish Armed Forces, together with a number of Arctic and European allies, will explore in the coming weeks how an increased presence and exercise activity in the Arctic can be implemented in practice,” he said.

On Thursday, he said the intention was “to establish a more permanent military presence with a larger Danish contribution,” and to invite allies to take part in exercises and training on a rotating basis, according to Danish broadcaster DR.

While the European troops are largely symbolic at this point, the timing was no accident.

The deployment “serves both to send a political signal and military signal to America, but also indeed to recognize that Arctic security should be reinforced more,” said Maria Martisiute, an analyst at the European Policy Center in Brussels. “And first and foremost, this should be done through allied effort, not by the U.S. coming and wanting to take it over. So it complicates the situation for the U.S.”

Talking to NATO

The European efforts are Danish-led and not coordinated through NATO, which is dominated by the United States. But the European allies are keen to keep NATO in play, and Germany said that “the aim is to obtain a well-founded picture on the ground for further talks and planning within NATO.”

Poulsen has said he and Greenland’s foreign minister plan to meet NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte in Brussels on Monday to discuss security in and around the Arctic. NATO has been studying ways to bolster security in the Arctic region.

“I’m really looking forward for an announcement of some kind of military activity or deployment under NATO’s framework,” Martisiute said. “Otherwise there is indeed a risk that … NATO is paralyzed and that would not be good.”

Sylvain Plazy in Brussels contributed to this report.

By LINLEY SANDERS, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump’s second term has been eventful. You wouldn’t know it from his approval numbers.

An AP-NORC poll from January found that about 4 in 10 U.S. adults approve of Trump’s performance as president. That’s virtually unchanged from March 2025, shortly after he took office for the second time.

The new poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research does show subtle signs of vulnerability for the Republican president. Trump hasn’t convinced Americans that the economy is in good shape, and many question whether he has the right priorities when he’s increasingly focused on foreign intervention. His approval rating on immigration, one of his signature issues, has also slipped since he took office.

Here’s how Americans’ views of Trump have — and haven’t — changed over the past year, according to AP-NORC polling.

About 4 in 10 Americans consistently approved of Trump’s performance

Call it a gift or a curse — for all his unpredictability, Trump’s approval numbers just don’t change very much.

President Donald Trump holds a bill that returns whole milk to school cafeterias across the country, in the Oval Office of the White House, Wednesday, Jan. 14, 2026, in Washington. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

This was largely the case during his first term in office, too. Early in his first term, 42% of Americans approved of how he was handling the presidency. There were some ups and downs over the ensuing years, but he left office with almost the same approval.

That level of consistency on presidential approval numbers could be the new normal for U.S. politics — or it could be unique to Trump. Gallup polling since the 1950s shows that presidential approval ratings have grown less variable over time. But President Joe Biden had a slightly different experience. Biden, a Democrat, entered the White House with higher approval numbers than Trump has ever received, but those fell rapidly during his first two years in office, then stayed low for the remainder of his term.

Most Americans have held a critical view of Trump throughout his time in office, and Americans are twice as likely to say he’s focused on the wrong priorities than the right ones. About half of U.S. adults say he’s mostly focusing on the wrong priorities one year into his second term, and approximately 2 in 10 say he’s mostly focused on the right priorities. Another 2 in 10, roughly, say it’s been about an even mix, and 14% say they don’t have an opinion.

Challenges on the economy

The economy has haunted Trump in his first year back in the White House, despite his insistence that “the Trump economic boom has officially begun.”

Just 37% of U.S. adults approve of how Trump is handling the economy. That’s up slightly from 31% in December — which marked a low point for Trump — but Trump started out with low approval on this issue, which doesn’t give him a lot of room for error.

The economy is a new problem for Trump. His approval rating on this issue in his first term fluctuated, but it was typically higher. Close to half of Americans approved of Trump’s economic approach for much of his first White House stint, and he’s struggled to adjust to this as a weak point. Americans care a lot more about costs than they did in Trump’s first term, and, like Biden, he’s persistently asserted that the U.S. economy is not a problem while the vast majority describe it as “poor.”

About 6 in 10 U.S. adults say Trump has done more to hurt the cost of living in his second term, while only about 2 in 10 say he’s done more to help. About one-quarter say he hasn’t made an impact.

Views of Trump’s handling of immigration have declined

When Trump entered office, immigration was among his strongest issues. It’s since faded, a troubling sign for Trump, who campaigned on both economic prosperity and crackdowns to illegal immigration.

Related Articles

What’s next for Greenland and Denmark after difficult meeting with Trump administration

Senators launch a cross-party effort to end stock trading by lawmakers

Fear and anger spread after another immigration shooting in Minneapolis

Federal officer shoots person in leg after being attacked during Minneapolis arrest, officials say

Demonstrator injured after federal agent fired projectile from close range during California protest

Just 38% of U.S. adults approve of how Trump is handling immigration, down from 49% in March. The poll was conducted Jan. 8-11, shortly after the death of Renee Good, who was shot and killed by a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer in Minneapolis.

But there are signs that Americans still give Trump some leeway on immigration issues. About half of U.S. adults say Trump has “gone too far” when it comes to deporting immigrants living in the country illegally, which is unchanged since April, despite an immigration crackdown that spread to cities across the U.S. in the second half of the year.

Nearly half of Americans, 45%, say Trump has helped immigration and border security “a lot” or “a little” in his second term. This is an area where Democrats are more willing to give Trump some credit. About 2 in 10 Democrats say Trump has helped on this issue, higher than the share of Democrats who say he’s helped on costs or job creation.

As Trump turns to foreign policy, most Americans disapprove of his approach

Trump has focused his attention more on foreign policy in his second term, and polling shows most Americans disapprove of his approach.

But much like Trump’s overall approval, views of his handling of foreign policy have changed little in his second term, despite wide-ranging actions including his push to control Greenland and the recent military capture of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.

About 6 in 10 Americans disapprove of how Trump is handling the issue of foreign policy, and most Americans, 56%, say Trump has “gone too far” in using the U.S. military to intervene in other countries.

Trump’s continued focus on global issues could be a liability given its sharp contrast with the “America First” platform he ran on and Americans’ growing concern with costs at home. But it could also be hard to shift views on the issue — even if Trump takes more dramatic action in the coming months.

The AP-NORC poll of 1,203 adults was conducted Jan. 8-11 using a sample drawn from NORC’s probability-based AmeriSpeak Panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population. The margin of sampling error for adults overall is plus or minus 3.9 percentage points.

By JOEY CAPPELLETTI, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — Two senators from opposite parties are joining forces in a renewed push to ban members of Congress from trading stocks, an effort that has broad public support but has repeatedly stalled on Capitol Hill.

Democratic Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand of New York and Republican Sen. Ashley Moody of Florida on Thursday plan to introduce legislation, first shared with The Associated Press, that would bar lawmakers and their immediate family members from trading or owning individual stocks.

FILE -Sen. Ashley Moody, R-Fla., speaks during the confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee for Kash Patel, President Donald Trump’s choice to be director of the FBI, at the Capitol in Washington, Jan. 30, 2025. (AP Photo/Ben Curtis, File)

It’s the latest in a flurry of proposals in the House and the Senate to limit stock trading in Congress, lending bipartisan momentum to the issue. But the sheer number of proposals has clouded the path forward. Republican leaders in the House are pushing their own bill on stock ownership, an alternative that critics have dismissed as watered down.

“There’s an American consensus around this, not a partisan consensus, that members of Congress and, frankly, senior members of administrations and the White House, shouldn’t be making money off the backs of the American people,” Gillibrand said in an interview with the AP on Wednesday.

Bipartisan support but no consensus

Trading of stock by members of Congress has been the subject of ethics scrutiny and criminal investigations in recent years, with lawmakers accused of using the information they gain as part of their jobs — often not known to the public — to buy and sell stocks at significant profit. Both parties have pledged to stop stock trading in Washington in campaign ads, creating unusual alliances in Congress.

Related Articles

What’s next for Greenland and Denmark after difficult meeting with Trump administration

What Americans think about Trump’s first year back in office, according to AP-NORC polling

Fear and anger spread after another immigration shooting in Minneapolis

Federal officer shoots person in leg after being attacked during Minneapolis arrest, officials say

Demonstrator injured after federal agent fired projectile from close range during California protest

In the House, for example, Republican Rep. Anna Paulina Luna of Florida is trying to bypass party leadership and force a vote on her own stock trading bill. Her push with a discharge petition has 79 of the 218 signatures required, the majority of them Democrats.

House Republican leaders are supporting an alternative bill that would prohibit members of Congress and their spouses from buying individual stocks but would not require lawmakers to divest from stocks they already own. It would mandate public notice seven days before a lawmaker sells a stock. The bill advanced in committee on Wednesday, but its prospects are unclear.

Gillibrand and Moody, meanwhile, are introducing a version of a House bill introduced last year by Reps. Chip Roy, a Republican from Texas, and Seth Magaziner, a Democrat from Rhode Island. That proposal, which has 125 cosponsors, would ban members of Congress from buying or selling individual stocks altogether.

Magaziner and other House Democrats, including Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, wrote in a joint statement Wednesday that they “are disappointed that the bill introduced by Republican leadership today fails to deliver the reform that is needed.”

The Senate bill from Gillibrand and Moody would give lawmakers 180 days to divest their individual stock holdings after the bill takes effect, while newly elected members would have 90 days from being sworn in to divest. Lawmakers would be prohibited from trading and owning certain other financial assets, including securities, commodities and futures.

“The American people must be able to trust that their elected officials are focused on results for the American people and not focused on profiting from their positions,” Moody wrote in response to a list of questions from the AP.

The president would be exempt

The legislation would exempt the president and vice president, a carveout likely to draw criticism from some Democrats. Similar objections were raised last year over a bill that barred members of Congress from issuing certain cryptocurrencies but did not apply to the president.

Gillibrand said the president “should be held to the same standard” but described the legislation as “a good place to start.”

“I don’t think we have to allow the perfect to be the enemy of the good,” Gillibrand said. “There’s a lot more I would love to put in this bill, but this is a consensus from a bipartisan basis and a consensus between two bodies of Congress.”

Moody, responding to written questions, wrote that Congress has the “constitutional power of the purse” so it’s important that its members don’t have “any other interests in mind, financial or otherwise.”

“Addressing Members of Congress is the number one priority our constituents are concerned with,” she wrote.

Making a law or campaign fodder?

It remains to be seen if the bill will reach a vote in the Senate. A similar bill introduced by Gillibrand and GOP Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri in 2023 never advanced out of committee.

Still, the issue has salience on the campaign trail. Moody is seeking election to her first full term in Florida this year after being appointed to her seat when Marco Rubio became secretary of state. Gillibrand chairs the Senate Democrats’ campaign arm.

“The time has come,” Gillibrand said. “We have consensus, and there’s a drumbeat of people who want to get this done.”

By MARCIA DUNN, Associated Press Aerospace Writer

CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. (AP) — An ailing astronaut returned to Earth with three others on Thursday, ending their space station mission more than a month early in NASA’s first medical evacuation.

SpaceX guided the capsule to a middle-of-the-night splashdown in the Pacific near San Diego, less than 11 hours after the astronauts exited the International Space Station. Their first stop was a hospital for an overnight stay.

“Obviously, we took this action (early return) because it was a serious medical condition,” NASA’s new administrator Jared Isaacman said following splashdown. “The astronaut in question is fine right now, in good spirits and going through the proper medical checks.”

It was an unexpected finish to a mission that began in August and left the orbiting lab with only one American and two Russians on board. NASA and SpaceX said they would try to move up the launch of a fresh crew of four; liftoff is currently targeted for mid-February.

NASA’s Zena Cardman and Mike Fincke were joined on the return by Japan’s Kimiya Yui and Russia’s Oleg Platonov. Officials have refused to identify the astronaut who developed the health problem last week or explain what happened, citing medical privacy.

While the astronaut was stable in orbit, NASA wanted them back on Earth as soon as possible to receive proper care and diagnostic testing. The entry and splashdown required no special changes or accommodations, officials said, and the recovery ship had its usual allotment of medical experts on board.

The astronauts emerged from the capsule, one by one, within an hour of splashdown. They were helped onto reclining cots and then whisked away for standard medical checks, waving to the cameras. Isaacman monitored the action from Mission Control in Houston, along with the crew’s families.

NASA decided a few days ago to take the entire crew straight to a San Diego-area hospital following splashdown and even practiced helicopter runs there from the recovery ship. The astronaut in question will receive in-depth medical checks before flying with the rest of the crew back to Houston on Friday, assuming everyone is well enough. Platonov’s return to Moscow was unclear.

Related Articles

Today in History: January 15, ‘Great Molasses Flood’ kills 21

Public mistrust linked to drop in deceased donor organ donations and kidney transplants

California’s scenic Highway 1 near Big Sur reopens 3 years after damaging landslides

Recalled ‘Super Greens’ diet supplement powder sickens 45 with salmonella

NASA sends 4 astronauts back to Earth in first medical evacuation

NASA stressed repeatedly over the past week that this was not an emergency. The astronaut fell sick or was injured on Jan. 7, prompting NASA to call off the next day’s spacewalk by Cardman and Fincke, and ultimately resulting in the early return. It was the first time NASA cut short a spaceflight for medical reasons. The Russians had done so decades ago.

Spacewalk preparations did not lead to the medical situation, Isaacman noted, but for anything else, “it would be very premature to draw any conclusions or close any doors at this point.” It’s unknown whether the same thing could have happened on Earth, he added.

The space station has gotten by with three astronauts before, sometimes even with just two. NASA said it will be unable to perform a spacewalk, even for an emergency, until the arrival of the next crew, which has two Americans, one French and one Russian astronaut.

Isaacman said it’s too soon to know whether the launch of station reinforcements will take priority over the agency’s first moonshot with astronauts in more than a half-century. The moon rocket moves to the pad this weekend at Florida’s Kennedy Space Center, with a fueling test to be conducted by early next month. Until all that is completed, a launch date cannot be confirmed; the earliest the moon flyaround could take off is Feb. 6.

For now, NASA is working in parallel on both missions, with limited overlap of personnel, according to Isaacman.

“If it comes down to a point in time to where we have to deconflict between two human spaceflight missions, that is a very good problem to have at NASA,” he told reporters.

The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Department of Science Education and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.