Former Denmark prime minister on Greenland

As Europe prepares for President Trump's address in Davos, let's discuss reaction with CBS News foreign correspondent Ramy Inocencio. Good morning, Ramy. As we mentioned, you've been speaking to Anders Fogh Rasmussen, the former prime minister of Denmark. Viewers may also recognize him as NATO's former secretary general. Considering the threat to NATO, what does he make of Mr. Trump's pursuit of Greenland? Absolutely. And Anders Fogh Rasmussen was-- well, he just didn't hold back on any punches, Errol. For Denmark, he told me it is a betrayal by the United States after being allies for 250 years. And then for NATO from his role there, looking at the world, he said it is a catastrophe to see this current world order, forged after the Second World War, now breaking apart because of Donald Trump. It's a painful process. Since childhood, I have admired the United States. As prime minister and secretary general of NATO, I worked closely with American presidents. I have always considered the US a natural leader of the free world. But now everything has changed, so it's really painful.

And Greenland's Prime Minister, Jens-Frederik Nielsen, just warned his people, 57,000 or so Greenlanders-- so many of them we've seen protesting-- to prep for a possible US invasion. Is this being overly dramatic or perhaps scarily realistic? I think it's timely to show the United States what is a fact. Namely, the Greenlanders do not want to become Americans. Greenland is not for sale. So the only possibility for the US would be a hostile military action against Greenland, which would mark the end of NATO and the end of the world order as we know it. And the only winners would be Putin and Xi Jinping. If the US broke off from NATO, how strong would that security alliance then be militarily? It would be a significant weakening of NATO, but I think a more probable development would be that the Europeans would consider establishing what I would call a European NATO to protect Europe against any attack. However, the speed, the efficiency, the power would be severely reduced. Greenland now serves as what I would call a weapon of mass distraction, not destruction but mass distraction because the discussion on Greenland distracts attention from the real security challenges. If President Trump does end up using military force to take Greenland, as former prime minister, should the Danish armed forces even reply? Would they reply? Danish troops must defend Danish territory, including in Greenland. Obviously, we would be faced with an overwhelming power from the United States, but for many Danes, it would be incomprehensible to see a fight against Danish troops and American troops. We used to fight together in Iraq, in Afghanistan, and, in fact, compared to the size of Denmark, we suffered more losses in Afghanistan than the United States. And I have a plea to the American congress and the American people. Now, time has come to convince President Trump that he must engage in a more constructive negotiation on how to accommodate his legitimate concerns about security in the Arctic. And I want to point out that Anders Fogh Rasmussen was Denmark's prime minister during 9/11. He led. He pulled Denmark to the US's side. He said it made sense at the time but also says that if he had known then what he knows right now, he would have diversified relations. He said that Europe now has to do that away from the United States, Errol, and to do it fast.

Remarkable that he said this was painful for him. Really interesting insight there, Ramy. Thank you very much.