00:00Anders Fogras, Mewsson, welcome to Europe Today.
00:03I just want to ask you about the situation with NATO at the moment.
00:07You have a President of the United States consistently denigrating the alliance,
00:12saying it's a paper tiger, saying even Putin, things like this,
00:15at the same time removing sanctions against Russian oil.
00:19How bad is the situation?
00:22I consider it the worst challenge for NATO during the history of a very successful alliance.
00:32So I think we in Europe should conclude we have to be able to stand on our own feet.
00:41So we should strengthen our defense, build on a coalition of the willing
00:48that could build a strong European pillar within NATO.
00:53We need a more European NATO.
00:56How does that work?
00:57First of all, time is of the essence.
00:59Do we have the time at the moment when there's such concerns
01:03around access to military equipment and so on?
01:07And then how does it work within NATO?
01:08Does that mean that you're sort of sidelined in the United States?
01:11Would the United States have to agree to that?
01:13No, it's not sidelining the United States.
01:16The United States has expressed the will itself to see Europe take care of itself.
01:28So it's not a contradiction with the American thinking.
01:32And I think a strengthening of a European pillar would also strengthen NATO as such.
01:40And I think the best way to strengthen the European pillar within NATO would be to build a coalition
01:48of the willing, including Ukraine.
01:51So far, we have been speaking about a coalition of the willing to help Ukraine.
01:57But I think Ukraine has demonstrated so much capability militarily, so battle-tested military capabilities
02:08that Ukraine could be an asset we can use building a new European security architecture.
02:16And what about the time-wise?
02:18Because the military industrial base is very much at a low level right now.
02:22There's real concerns about access to military equipment, particularly since the war in Iran.
02:29The timeline is of the essence.
02:33And we need to accelerate our building up a stronger defense industrial base.
02:43We need to produce weapons and ammunition much, much faster than in the past.
02:50And we should also accelerate our attempts to achieve the 5% goal that NATO decided last year,
03:03that each ally should invest at least 5% of GDP in defense.
03:08I think instead of saying we should achieve that by 2035, we should do it already by 2030.
03:18You're obviously the former prime minister of Denmark, so you're European.
03:21Where do you stand then on the issue of European preference?
03:24Because the Europeans are going to be spending a colossal amount of money on defense now.
03:29Should it all be mainly going to the European defense industry for a number of reasons,
03:34not just because obviously the money is coming from Europe and should be spent in Europe,
03:37but also because of concerns about the hostile nature of the United States these days?
03:43Yeah, but my point is the following.
03:46We should purchase weapons and ammunition where it is right now because time is of the essence.
03:53But in a longer-term perspective, we should be capable of producing much more on our own in Europe.
04:01We cannot be dependent on other countries.
04:04We should reduce our dependency on foreign actors like the United States, but also other countries.
04:13So we should not be naive.
04:16So in certain cases, I would give preference to European weapons and ammunition.
04:22Did you ever think you'd see the day where you're saying that you have to,
04:27that NATO should and Europe should move away from the United States in such a way
04:31that we need to be careful not to be naive?
04:34I mean, such is the nature of the relationship with the U.S. right now.
04:38Well, for me, this has been a very painful process.
04:43Since childhood, I have admired the United States.
04:46I saw the United States as a natural leader of the free world.
04:50As prime minister of Denmark, I worked closely with the then-President George W. Bush.
04:56As NATO secretary general, I worked closely with President Obama.
05:01I've always considered the United States the closest ally, not only of Denmark, but of Europe as such.
05:10For me, it's been painful to conclude that we have to reduce our dependence on the United States.
05:19But that is the state of affairs today.
05:23And how was it then when you were watching what was happening with Greenland,
05:28with the president of the United States saying they need to take Greenland,
05:31with the denigration of the sacrifices made by Danish troops in Afghanistan,
05:36then on par with the sacrifices of the United States only?
05:41Yeah, but it was unheard that the leader of the biggest ally within a collective defense organization
05:50threatens another ally with the aim to grasp land by force.
05:56Had that happened, it would be the end of NATO.
06:00It doesn't make sense to have a collective defense organization where the biggest ally threatens another ally.
06:10Fortunately, President Trump backed off that threat,
06:16and now we have embarked on a more traditional diplomatic path.
06:21And I think we can accommodate his legitimate concerns without military attacks on Greenland and Denmark.
06:33For instance, when it comes to defending the Arctic, including Greenland, I fully agree.
06:40We should have a stronger military presence in the Arctic and in Greenland.
06:45That can be accommodated within the existing defense agreement between Denmark and the U.S.
06:53And NATO has developed an Arctic strategy, paving the way for more permanent military presence in the Arctic.
07:01But I suppose the lesson is that the United States isn't the ally that you once thought it was.
07:06Obviously, things have changed, and we have to change our strategies and our thinking similarly.
07:15And that's why my conclusion is we should build a coalition of the willing,
07:21a group of European countries that are capable and willing to do what is needed to defend Europe.
07:28Just before I let you go, the situation in the Strait of Ormboz is changing every hour.
07:32And the ceasefire looks like it may be extended, but there's no changes to actually reopening the strait.
07:38What do you think needs to be done now?
07:40I mean, from a NATO perspective, they're saying we can only be there once the hostilities have come to an
07:46end.
07:47But how does this situation get resolved?
07:50Well, I think two strategic mistakes were made right from the beginning.
07:55But then Trump launched a war without consulting his allies,
07:59and he cannot expect allies to clear up the mess if they are not involved in launching the conflict.
08:10But the Europeans made the strategic mistake to declare that this war is not Europe's war,
08:17because the consequences are severe when it comes to enterprises and in other respects for all of us.
08:26So we are in this together.
08:28I think we should use the opportunity to tell Trump,
08:31OK, we will help you out of this mess, provided that you do not impose tariffs on Europe, your allies,
08:41provided that you will stay engaged in Europe, including continue to help Ukraine, something for something.
08:49Yeah, transactional.
08:50That's a transactional approach.
08:53Time has come to play hardball.
08:56Yeah.
08:56Time for flattering is over.
08:58Do you think that it's too late for that?
09:01I mean, obviously, you said that Trump should have consulted his allies.
09:04The likelihood is those allies would have said, we are not engaging in hostilities with Iran.
09:08Maybe there's concerns about the fact that there isn't enough evidence to say that Iran was a threat.
09:15Second of all, the war in Iran was deeply unpopular all across Europe.
09:18So these governments have to deal with their constituents and their voters as well.
09:22But OK, taking that aside, is it too late for Europe to now maybe do an about face and say,
09:27OK, let's work on it together?
09:29No, I think actually Europe should use this situation as a leverage to change the relationship between Europe and the
09:39United States.
09:41We should speak to President Trump the same way as he speaks to us.
09:47And that's why my proposal would be for Europe to correct the mistake they made when they declared this war
09:57is not our war and try to get the best out of this for Europe.
10:05Final question then.
10:06Who do you propose should speak to Donald Trump in the way he speaks to us?
10:10Would you suggest Mark Rutte maybe changes his tone a little bit or would you say something like the president
10:15of France or maybe Maloney?
10:19Well, I would leave it to the political leaders to decide.
10:23We have in the past, we have seen European delegations meet up in the White House.
10:31My point is just this.
10:34Trump only respects a firm stance.
10:39And that's why I say time for flattering is over.
10:44And then just final question, because you're here for the space conference.
10:48Can you explain a little bit about the importance of space sovereignty and space in relation to the future of
10:54defence?
10:54We have seen in the wars in both Ukraine and Iran how important satellites are for the defence.
11:05Space has been weaponised.
11:09So it's dangerous for Europe to be dependent on other actors when it comes to space.
11:15And the fact is, today, America has ten times as many satellites as Europe.
11:23And in Europe, we are not able to launch satellites ourselves, at least only at a very, very slow pace.
11:31So we have to invest in more satellites, in more launches.
11:36And we also have to introduce robust regulation to ensure an equitable access to space,
11:45so that space will not be monopolised by erratic American billionaires.
11:53Okay, Anders Fogh-Rasmussen, thank you very much for joining us on Europe Today.
11:57Thank you for having me.
Comments