Name: Could the EU consider implementing counter-tariffs or taking coordinated action? | DW News
Uploaded: 2026-01-18T17:51:06.000Z
Duration: 13 min 57 s
Description: Thousands of YouTube videos with English-Chinese subtitles! Now you can learn to understand native speakers, expand your vocabulary, and improve your pronunciation...

Denmark's Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen says Europe will not yield to pressure and blackmail over US President Donald Trump's plans to annex Greenland.

Basic passive voice

EU ambassadors are set to hold an emergency meeting over Trump's new threat to raise tariffs on eight European countries until they allow the US to buy the autonomous Danish territory.

Trump claims he needs the Arctic island for national security reasons.

A threatening Denmark plays right into Russian President Vladimir Putin's hands.

Ice, space and strategic power for the United States, Greenland is a gateway to the Arctic, a region growing in military and economic importance as ice melts and new shipping routes open.

The White House's latest attempt to annex the world's largest island is to mount economic pressure on the EU countries that support Greenland's sovereignty.

President Donald Trump posted that starting from the 1st of February, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, France, Germany, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and Finland will be charged a 10% tariff on any and all goods sent to the United States of America.

European leaders have warned against what they call a dangerous downward spiral if the levies are implemented.

The EU's foreign policy chief, Kaya Kallas, replying in a post, China and Russia must be having a field day.

They are the ones who benefit from divisions among allies.

If Greenland's security is at risk, we can address this inside NATO.

Tariffs risk making Europe and the United States poorer and undermine our shared prosperity.

One British MP warned of the impact on global peace.

Yeah, we think it's totally wrong that he'd do that.

This is an ally of ours, an ally of the US's.

It's part of NATO, hugely important alliance in terms of world peace.

Trump argues Greenland is vital to counter Russia.

Its location between North America and Russia makes it central to missile defense, Arctic surveillance and future shipping routes.

The US already has military bases on the island and has traditionally worked closely with Denmark on security.

As Washington signals it's prepared to take what it wants, the island remains at the centre of a global contest, even as its own people insist their future is not for sale.

John Glynn is a chief economist at the Chartered Institute of Procurement and Supply, joining us from Manchester.

How worried is the business community about the possibility of these further tariffs?

Well, the business community is always influenced by the noise that is coming out of Washington, but to that extent, we have differentiate between the rhetoric, the noise and the reality.

So from a European perspective, and particularly from what we might call the Greenland 8, they're particularly impacted by US tariffs on automobiles and on Machinery of which we export quite a lot, and they have been hit most by the tariffs.

But if you look at the other portfolio of products inside the European Union, deals have been cut in closed doors behind all of the noise, which mean that the average level of tariffs for those products is much lower.

So there's a whole diplomatic issue that has to be maintained here.

If we can maintain a degree of certainty, if we can lower the noise, lower the rhetoric, then we can keep these negotiations going.

So maybe one way to look through the noise is to look at what has come before.

We've been here before, the threats, the tariff tables in the Rose Garden and those tariffs were imposed.

John, were the initial round of US Tariffs as bad for businesses trying to get goods into the US as we initially feared?

Although my friends in Stuttgart who've been hit by, as I said, the impact of tariffs on automotive and machinery, they have taken a hit.

But other areas, blood products, pharmaceuticals, aerospace, gas turbines, you know, the average level of tariffs there is around 2, 3%, nowhere near the 15, 16% that automotive are feeling.

French President Emmanuel Macron is urging the European Commission to consider triggering its so called anti coercion instrument.

The official or the unofficial name for that is the bazooka, the trade bazooka.

The language is starting to sound like we're on the brink of a trade war.

So there is an issue of in Europe, we don't want to be seen to be taking a step backward.

You know, if somebody is going to come and bully you, as it were, it's important that you stand up to that.

But then at the same time, it's important that in the background we start negotiating.

It wants resource and it wants geopolitical military safety.

Both of those can be achieved in agreement with the European Union, or both of those can be advanced to a greater extent in agreement with the European Union and with NATO.

So it makes sense to maintain those relationships, to maintain those alliances.

And I think that's what, what I tend to refer to the adults in the room behind the rhetoric coming out of Washington are going to be seeking to try and maintain.

Because usually when a political situation threatens to get out of control, you hear people urging dialogue.

Do you think many business owners exporting to the United States will have faith that talking and reasoning with Donald Trump is the best way forward?

Or as you say, are these conversations best had between others?

I think reasoning with Donald Trump is a difficult thing to do.

You know, but we have to accept that there's going to be that level of noise.

But then we negotiate in the background, we try and make common sense agreements that are good for all parties in the background.

And we've seen that to a certain extent in terms of the tariffs absent in what I said about automotive and machinery.

We need to make sure that we get an outcome which is good for trade, is good for our economies, is good for the global economy, is good for wealth creation in North America and wealth creation in the European Union, and assures the access to resource that we need going forward to maintain our wealth, and assures the access to.

To geopolitically important regions of the world where those relationships already exist, as you showed in your trailer, to this section of your program.

We just need to extend those relationships and ensure that we all get what we want out of these negotiations.

John Glenn is the Chief Economist at the Chartered Institute of Procurement and Supply, joining us from Manchester.

Chris Southworth is the Secretary General of the International Chamber of Commerce in the United Kingdom, joining us from Manchester.

You're working so closely with businesses around the world, particularly in the uk.

How worried are they about current developments?

How worried is the business community about the possibility of further tariffs?

Well, the UK business community will be just as concerned as business communities right across Europe, particularly northern Europe, who are most impacted by this, and also US business.

We shouldn't forget that US businesses are in the same position we are for much of the case, but under a much more challenging situation where they can't necessarily speak up.

So, you know, we have huge interest in this from the uk, both from an economic point of view, but also from a political point of view, a military defence point of view, and also a constitutional point of view.

Don't forget, Canada is a member of the Commonwealth with King Charles as head of state.

And with the largest economy and military presence in the northern flank of Europe.

So, you know, there's lots of common interest here.

You know, Greenland, let's not forget what's going on in the Greenland area, in the Arctic in general is climate change has led to a thawing of the ice and that's opened up major shipping lines, lanes on both sides of Greenland.

And so there's a lot of new activity and new potential there to cut shipping and trade with multiple different differing interests across that Arctic region.

Chris, with all of that in mind, we have Been here before the threats, the tariff tables in the Rose Garden and Trump's there, the big show those tariffs were imposed.

Were the initial round of US tariffs as bad for business trying to get goods into the US as we feared initially?

It's so hard for businesses or even those involved in it frankly, to keep track of what's actually happened versus what's actually been said.

So if you look at what was announced in Liberation Day earlier last year in April, that was anything from 10% to 20% plus.

Actually, if you look at what's going on now, the average European tariff going into the US is 2 to 5%, far less with the exception of some sectors like automotive, which is slightly higher at 15%.

So there's a lot of noise on tariffs, but the reality is quite different and some tariffs haven't come in at all.

So for all the talk of tariffs, I think the priority now is just to stay calm.

We need to support a diplomatic dialogue and there's no guarantee that any tariffs will happen at all.

It leads me to the next question of what to do now.

What options do the affected countries realistically have to respond?

Could we see counter tariffs or coordinated EU action in response?

Well, I think the Europe in general, the UK and the EU together are playing a smart game.

You know, let's keep this diplomatic and off X and social media.

You know, there is a lot of shared economic and political and defense interests here, so there's absolutely no reason why we should be having any of this conversation, frankly.