Denmark and the Future of NATO: What Comes Next for Western Security?

- The dictators are profiting from our disunity. That's why I'm speaking about creating an alliance of democracies. If we take all the world's democracies together, including the us, then we were percent 60% of the global economy.

- This is today's battlegrounds. Our discussions with leaders from around the world consider how history produced the present, and how we can work together to overcome obstacles, to progress, seize opportunities, and build a better tomorrow.

- On this episode of Today's Battlegrounds, our focus is on Denmark. Our guest is Anders Fae Raus, who served as Prime Minister of Denmark from 2001 to 2009, and as the 12th Secretary General of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, nato. From 2009 to 2014, Rasmussen became Denmark's youngest member of Parliament at age 25, and he was named Minister of Economic Affairs in 1990. In June, 2022, Ukrainian president Volmer Zelensky asked Rasmussen to co-chair an international task force on security guarantees for Ukraine. The resulting key of security compact became the basis for a web of security guarantees negotiated between Ukraine and NATO allies. That was formalized in a new Ukraine compact at the 2024 NATO Summit in Washington. Denmark's history reflects its position at the crossroads of European power, politics, and maritime trade. The Danish kingdom emerged in the early medieval period and during the Viking age projected influence across the North Atlantic and into the British Isles. In the late 14th century, Denmark became a composite monarchy that included Norway and territories in the North Atlantic. But military defeats in the following centuries reduced its territory. Denmark established itself as a constitutional monarchy in 1849 during World War ii, Denmark maintained neutrality until Nazi Germany occupied the country. In 1940, Denmark became a founding member of nato. In 1949, Denmark established colonial control over Greenland in the early 18th century and gradually integrated the territory into the Danish state. In 1941, during Nazi Germany's occupation of Denmark, Denmark signed an agreement granting the United States responsibility for Greenland's defense. That agreement began a permanent US presence on the island, which was formalized in 1951, and enabled the construction of Tulley airbase now called PTU Space Base, which became a essential note in missile warning and space surveillance during the Cold War. The 2009 Self-Governance Act expanded greenland's autonomy and affirmed the right of its people to determine their future As concerns about missile defense and Russian and Chinese encroachment in the Arctic grow, Greenland is even more important to European and North American security. In 2025 and 2026, the Trump administration's expressed interest in acquiring Greenland, created friction with Denmark and raised questions about us respect for sovereignty. Within an alliance built on trust, Denmark has made clear its position that any decision on Greenland's future rests with its people. We welcome Secretary General Rasmussen back to today's battlegrounds to discuss international security, the prospects for the US Danish relationship, and the health of the NATO and transatlantic relationship as wars continue in Ukraine and the Middle East.

- Prime Minister Anders Foe. Rasmussen, welcome back to Today's Battlegrounds. Thank you for making time for me and, and for our international audience. Great to see you.

- Thank you for having me once again. There is a lot to discuss

- There. There certainly is. You've been deeply involved in supporting Ukraine in, in its defense against the, the Russian aggression there, especially since the massive invasion of Ukraine, which occurred right after we talked the last time. And you recently chaired co-chaired the task force that led to the ke security compact in 2024, you've argued for ironclad guarantees for security as a way to at least bring this war to a, at least a temporary end of the fight to a temporary end and work on a, a longer term solution that restores Ukrainian sovereignty. But I'd just love to, to hear your assessment of the war in in Ukraine and what you think the prospects are for restoring peace in Europe.

- The projects are quite bleak because of our hesitation actually to, to help Ukraine doing what is necessary. And I find it quite embarrassing that the western community, that the trying toland community as such is not able to push back against the Russian aggression. The fact is the following, as long as President Putin believes that he can win on the battlefield, he has no incentive whatsoever to engage constructively in a peace process. So the road to peace goes through a re armament of Ukraine. It goes through increased economic pressure on Russia. We have to change Putin's calculus through increased pressure militarily and economically on Russia.

- Yeah, you know, I could agree with you more. I, I think what provokes Putin is the perception of weakness. And not only does he think he can maybe make, continue to make these gains on the battlefield, which he's paying, I think a unsustainable high cost for, but also he's waging a broader shadow war against Europe. I mean, blowing up rail lines and warehouses, you know, putting out assassination contracts on, on, on European business leaders cutting undersea cables, a sustained campaign of of political subversion. Could you share with our viewers your, your perspective on, on European security? I mean, how serious is the threat to to to broader European security?

- Actually, it is European security at large that is at stake. If Putin gets any success in Ukraine, he won't stop in Ukraine. He will continue. He's already present with a Russian occupation of a part of Moldova in Transista. He's present in Georgia where he occupied occasion in Southeast some years ago. And I wouldn't exclude the possibility that he would put pressure on the three Baltic states. It may not be a direct attack because they're members of nato and that might provoke an activation of the famous NATO article five. But he can launch other kinds of pressures in particular on Lithuania, because Lithuania today hosts a transit link from mother Russia to the Russian enclave, gra. So it is about European security. If Putin gets success in Ukraine, he will continue, and by the end of this decade, he's able to attack even a NATO ally in Europe,

- You know, prime minister, and I think his ambitions are, are, are quite high despite really the, his, his destruction of his own economy taking over a million casualties, dead and s and and severely wounded in Ukraine. But I think what he's hoping for is to break Europe apart, break up the eu, break up the NATO alliance, run the transatlantic relationship to, to pursue that effort. He's engaged in a sustained campaign of political subversion support for extreme parties on the far left and the far right. But could you give, maybe give your assessment of how successful he is being, what's your assessment of politics in Europe? We're talking, you're just after the election in, in Hungary where the opposition candidate hand defeated Victor Orban, who has been really, I would just say, you know, an advocate for Putin in and, and almost a puppet for Putin in Europe. So that, that seems to bode well. But what is your overall assessment of politics in, in Europe and, and in relation to what, what Putin would like to achieve, you know, which is to render these relationships within the eu, within nato and the transatlantic relationship

- Or Putin has got some success, but you are quite right that the recent elections in Hungary is a setback for Putin because he has now lost a, a good friend in, in, in Hungary. But if you look at other European countries, he has had some, at least he has some supporters in other European countries. Take France as an example where Ra ra, national Marine lap party is running high in the opinion posts before the presidential election next year, and they are more pro-Russian and anti Ukraine than the current French government. Take the uk where farash leader of the UK reform party is running high in the opinion polls. He's also more pro-Russian anti Ukraine than the current government take Germany, where you have seen a rise in the support for alternative deland, which is clearly pro Russian. So in a few years time, you may be in a situation where the three biggest European countries are under heavy influence from political forces supporting Putin. So in that respect, he has had some success.

- So, so promise, what, what is your prescription for that? I mean, what can, what can European leaders do you know, what, how, how do you, how do you convince your citizens that Russia is being successful in dividing your societies and pitting people against each other, infringing on your sovereignty? What, what more can be done to counter this dynamic, which has its roots, I think in, in anger over, over migration, anger over economic issues. What, what's, what do you recommend?

- So you are right, this is not just about our relationship or our app with Russia or our approach to Russia. It's much broader. You are right in pointing to immigration as an example. So my key answer to your question is we need stronger European leadership and we need to address the real concerns of ordinary people, including when it comes to illegal immigration. We need Tofa, a tofa group approach to countering illegal immigration to Europe. But we also need a clear leadership when it comes to telling the European people that we cannot continue to rely on an outdated societal model in which we have relied on a combination of cheap energy from Russia, cheap goods from China, and cheap security from the United States. We have to be able to stand on our own feet.

- Robert, that's, there's, that's a really strong prescription. You know, of course, you know, the, the NATO and the, and the EU came out of the lessons of, of the two destructive world wars of the, of the 20th century. And, and you have, have been at the forefront of NATO leadership as Secretary General, but even before that Prime minister, I mean, you came to the aid of the United States after the mass murder attacks of, of nine 11 as a prime minister of Denmark and your forces, you know, I fought alongside them. They fought with great distinction. You had a, a very capable, courageous battle group in Hellman Province. And, and Denmark took more casualties per capita than any other NATO nation in, in, in defense, I would say of of all civilized people in the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in, in Afghanistan. Lately, the, the transatlantic relationship, NATO has come under duress in part because of President Trump's persistent deep skepticism of, of the alliance. And I would say what I would call, you know, gratuitous insults to European leaders, whether it's the support for Orban most recently the, the Davos speech in which he strung together a, a number of grievances and insults and then, and then insulting those who did come to the aid of the United States, Denmark directly with the threat to, to to, to invade Greenland. I mean, it's been a really rocky road in terms of the transatlantic relationship, and I think this has put great greater strain on nato. Could you just offer, what, what is your assessment? We just had Secretary General Ruta visit here in, in, in Washington. His, his, you know, his public statement was not that reassuring. You know, we haven't seen a rendering of, of the alliance, but what's your assessment of what can we do to maybe reverse this trend of, of erosion of trust and, and, and tension and, and lack of confidence in the alliance?

- I think to speak very honestly about it, that the best instrument to restore confidence and trust would be if the American administration would repeat exactly the words you used. I thank you very much for your comments on the Danish troops efforts alongside American and British troops in, in Afghanistan. And by the way, also in Iraq, I can tell you that Denmark used to be, I think one of the most pro-American countries in Europe, and we No,

- The poll, the polls. The polls showed that Absolutely, yes,

- Yes. And recently a new poll showed that the MO has changed. Now 60% of the Danish people considers the, the US an adversary. For me, that's a very painful development. Since childhood, I have admired the United States. I have considered the United States a natural leader of the free world. And as prime minister, I work closely with President George W. Bush as Na Secretary General, I worked closely with President Obama, irrespective of party affiliation. They strongly believed in American global leadership. I hope to see the United State will return to that clear position. Having said all that, I still consider NATO the cornerstone of European and North Atlantic security, but we have to reform nato. We, we have to give NATO a stronger European phase. And the first step was taken at the last NATO summit where all NATO allies committed to reaching the goal of investing at least 5% of GDP in defense. That was an important step. But we also need stronger commitment from, in particular European allies to invest, to develop the, a European defense industry so that we are able to stand on our own feet.

- You know, I'll tell, I'll tell you prime minister, I, I think, you know, there is an opportunity here because President Trump, even if he did it in, in a way that could be, could diminish confidence in the alliance, he did get that commitment now as, and I get a sense that he's almost fighting a rear guard against phantoms because he got really what, what he wanted, which is greater responsibility sharing in, in defense, for example. So I'm hoping things can improve, but now we're seeing Prime minister, we're seeing this, you know, this additional strain on the alliance based on, on the war in, in the Middle East and President Trump, of course, really not bringing any of our European allies along with us before the war, then asking for assistance, then insulting European allies again. So I, I think this, this war has put another strain on NATO in the transatlantic relationship. Can you maybe just share with our viewers the view of the war in the Middle East from the perspective of, of Europe and, and, and, and, and what you see the implications of that war? And I'm talking about obviously the war centered on, on Iran, but the broader conflict that involves Israeli actions, for example, against Hezbollah in, in Lebanon and, and the, and Iran's, you know, broader use of proxies across the region

- Of all IC no tears by the decapitation of the Iranian leadership. On the contrary, i I I, I see the view that we need regime change in Iran to stabilize the whole, the whole region. But I would say the way this war was started and has been conducted, has exposed President Trump to what I would say self-inflicted problems and wounds. Because you cannot expect NATO allies to come and clean up your mess if you do not engage your NATO allies right from the beginning. If President Trump had wanted this to become a NATO operation, then he would have followed the traditional procedure in nato. We have a meeting in the NATO council, we decided by unanimity to launch a war or whatever it might be. And then we are in this together in solidarity. But you cannot launch a war on your own and then expect your allies just to come and clean up the mess afterwards. So obviously I share the view that it's of utmost importance to open up the homeless strait. I also think that European allies to do what they can to help in that respect. But my plea would be that the American administration respects the rules in an alliance as nato.

- You know, it, it's a, it's an important outcome that you just mentioned, because I do think that there is not going to be a really sustained piece in, in the Middle East until there is a, just a, a fundamental shift in the nature of the Iranian government, such as it ceases what we have seen as a permanent hostility to the United States, Israel, it's Arab neighbors, Europe, you know, the, the West broadly. And I think that highlights that this is a war that we, maybe we could, maybe you could help our viewers understand the context for it. This, I see Iran is part of a broader axis of aggressors. You've already mentioned kinda the economic competition with China, for example, China's, you know, dumping of, of goods in, in, in, in Europe. We've touched a little bit, we, we talked about the, you know, the, the Greenland sort of strains the self-inflicted, I think by the Trump administration, but of course that that's based in, in Arctic security. The, the conflict the Middle East highlights the importance of, of economic security. And you already mentioned our industrial base, our defense industrial base. We have a lot of work to do on the vulnerability of supply chains. So what overall do you think is at stake at this moment and, and, and how does that highlight the importance of working together, not only within Europe, but between Europe, the United States, Canada, other allies and like-minded partners?

- Fully agree with you, we are confronted with anxi of aggressors, Russia, China, North Korea, Iran, you could mention other aggressors as well. And they are increasingly working together. We have seen how North Korea and Iran directly have helped Russia against Ukraine. So I think our conclusion should be that the world's democracies should work closer together. Unfortunately, seen from my perspective, the United States has withdrawn from the leadership of the free world. So I have suggested to create what I call democracy, seven d seven com, consisting of the, the European Union, the uk, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, South Korea, D seven, G seven, but D seven, that could be a column. And if those democratic contours work closer together, agree on free trade agreements, investment agreements, react collectively, if we are exposed to economic coercion b from begging or for that sake from the United States, we could secure the supply chain of critical minerals, et cetera, et cetera. The T seven, T seven could be the core around which we could include other countries and who would warmly welcome the United States into this club of an alliance of democracies. Once the United States wants to resume its natural place as the leader of the free world, but when the leader of the free world is on retirement, others will have to take over. And that's why I suggest to create a D seven,

- You know, prime minister. I think this could have a positive impact as well as just convincing, which I don't think, I think the vast majority of Americans already understand the importance of, of multinational cooperation, especially with our allies and partners in, in Europe, and as you mentioned, a across the free world, because our agenda should be common, you know, it's in terms of supply chain resilience, invigorating our, invigorating, our industrial base energy security, especially in relation to, to, to AI and the compute power and energy demands associated with that. And, and the economic promise for, for that and as well as, as as national security, international security, the need to address, you know, what has been underinvestment in defense modernization, defense capacity, arctic security, missile defense, drone defense. I mean, hey, it, it sounds like a common agenda to me. So could you lay out what is your optimistic vision for this? How do we get over, you know, the tensions and I think, you know, kind of the, what I would say the self-defeating behavior that, that we've seen in, in recent years and, and months,

- Basically, I, I, I see some positives of, obviously it was negative when President Trump declared the liberation day on the 2nd of April last year. Exposing friends and fos alike to high tariffs to declare a trade war against the whole world doesn't make sense. There are no winners in a trade war. There are only losers, including the American people. But as a consequence of this declaration of a trade war, I have seen progress when it comes to the conclusion of free trade agreements. For instance, the European Union has concluded a free trade agreement with a number of countries in Latin America called me, including Brazil. We have concluded a free trade agreement with India. We have concluded a free trade agreement with Australia. We have seen how Prime Minister Kearney has traveled Southeast Asia to, to mobilize support for, for new agreements among what he called the middle sized countries. So I see some positives, namely that provoke by the trade war. We have seen how democracies have agreed on a number of free trade arrangements to demonstrate to China, to the United States that free markets still pay.

- Well, I'll tell you, prime minister, I, I think that's a great message and I do think we should be more confident. You know what, you mentioned this axis of aggressors. I I think that all of them have overextended. I'd like you to just give your assessment of, if you don't mind, of Russia, China, you know, obviously Iran, North Korea, from my perspective, they saw, they saw Europe, the United States, the west broadly as weak, decadent, and divided. And as a result, they all overextended, you know, Russia and, and Ukraine, Iran with its attacks on Israel, the October 7th horrible attacks, the direct attacks in 2024, China's overextended economically in, in my view and the race to surpass us. So what, what is your assessment of the broader geostrategic competition? I think, you know, we should be more confident in, in our future and recognize some of these self-inflicted weaknesses by the axis of aggressors.

- I couldn't agree more. As I mentioned earlier, I, I find it embarrassing that we are not able to push back against the Russian aggression against Ukraine. Let's think about it. The size of the Russian economy is equivalent to Italy, Italy and Europe. Sure. So I think the only reason why Putin has some success in acting as a regional spoiler is our divisions in Europe and trying across the Atlantic. If we act together, then we represent a formidable force that can push back against the question from Russia, from China, from Iran, from elsewhere. The, the dictators are profiting from our disunity. That's why I'm speaking about creating an alliance of democracies. If we take all the world's democracies together, including the us, then we t 60% of the global economy. I mean, if, if we could work together instead of fighting each other, if we could work together, then we could easily handle the dictators of, of the world. So that's what I'm encouraging the, the American administration to fume its natural place as a leader of the free world.

- Well, at the Hoover Institution and on today's battlegrounds, we'll do everything we can to amplify your voice. I consider you, you know, one of the, the greatest statesmen you know, in the world today. I, I can't thank you enough for joining us. I'd like to give you just one final word at one final word for our, our audience.

- Since I was child, I have admired the United States and considered the United States a natural leader of the free world, and to that end, to make the United States great. You need friends, you need partners, you need allies. And one thing is for sure, you cannot make America great by threatening allies to grasp their land by force. On the contrary, we need to work together to release our voice, to strengthen our efforts against the advancing autos.

- Well, prime Minister Anders Foe Rasmussen, I cannot thank you no for joining us on today's battlegrounds, and, and I wish you the best. A as you continue to, to send a positive message, not only you know, to to Europe, but but across, across the free world. Thank you for joining us.

- Glad much for having me. And thank you for your efforts to amplify the words under the need for strengthened cooperation among the world's democracies.

- Thank you. Prime Minister

- Battlegrounds is a production of the Hoover Institution, where we generate and promote ideas advancing freedom. For more information about our work, to hear more of our podcasts or view our video content, please visit hoover.org.