Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Newsroom
European Allies United Amid Trump's New Tariff Threats Over Greenland; Protestors Gather Amid Threat of Federal Troop Deployment; U.S. Has Previously Purchased Land from Other Countries; 2025 Growth Goal Met as China's Birth Rate Hits New Low; Rome Reduces Speed Limit in Historic City Center. Aired 12-1a ET
Aired January 19, 2026 - 00:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
POLO SANDOVAL, CNN ANCHOR: Hey everybody, thank you so much for starting your week with us. I'm Polo Sandoval, live in New York. This is CNN NEWSROOM, and here's what's coming your way.
[00:00:43]
Key allies in Europe reach out to President Trump after an emergency meeting on his plans to annex Greenland. This as members of Trump's own party are divided over the impact such a move would have on NATO, and even the security of the Arctic region that the president says he's trying to protect.
And we'll talk to a presidential historian about the precedence [SIC] of leaders forcing countries to hand over land, and why this one seems to be different.
ANNOUNCER: Live from New York, this is CNN NEWSROOM with Polo Sandoval
SANDOVAL: All right, everybody. Let's begin this hour with U.S. President Donald Trump and his latest approach to claim control of Greenland.
His threats to impose tariffs on key European allies who stand in his way, they have only sparked a flurry of activity across the continent.
E.U. ambassadors, they held an emergency meeting on Sunday to formulate a response to the 10 percent tariffs that are set to go into effect on February the 1st.
NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte said that he spoke to President Trump about the issue and that they will continue to work on it.
British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, he also spoke with President Trump on the phone. He expressed that wielding tariffs against allies who are pursuing the collective security of NATO is wrong, said the British leader.
Trump also claims that the U.S. needs Greenland for national security reasons. In fact, he just posted this on social media a little while ago.
He writes, "NATO has been telling Denmark for 20 years that you have to get the Russian threat away from Greenland. Unfortunately, Denmark has been unable to do anything about it. Now it's time, and it will be done." Again, words from President Trump, posted a few moments ago.
But experts are arguing that undermining the transatlantic alliance will only weaken Arctic defense, and it's also playing right into the hands of China and Russia. On Sunday, Canada's prime minister weighed in to reiterate his support for Greenland.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MARK CARNEY, CANADIAN PRIME MINISTER: We always will support sovereignty and territorial integrity of countries wherever their geographic location.
The future of Greenland, decisions about the future of Greenland are for Greenland and Denmark to decide. And the -- and the security of Greenland. Security is first and foremost for them. But very much falls within the responsibilities of NATO.
And there's a full commitment -- not surprisingly, as is appropriate -- of NATO partners to the security of -- of Greenland.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANDOVAL: And even the prime minister of Italy, who we should say is often aligned with President Trump politically, well, also views the tariffs pressure as a misstep.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GIORGIA MELONI, ITALIAN PRIME MINISTER (through translator): I wanted to say that the prediction of an increase in tariffs against those nations that choose to contribute to the security of Greenland is, in my opinion, a mistake.
And obviously, I don't agree with it. I agree with the attention that the American presidency gives, as I've told you many times, to Greenland and, in general, to the Arctic, which is a strategic area.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANDOVAL: Our expert on foreign policy standing by. We'll get to them in just a moment.
But first, let's get things started with CNN's international diplomatic editor, Nic Robertson. He's in Greenland's capital with more on these growing tensions.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
NIC ROBERTSON, CNN INTERNATIONAL DIPLOMATIC EDITOR: Nations within the European Union and the U.K. who've been affected by President Trump's threat of tariffs. That's the countries who have sent NATO troops here to Nuuk and elsewhere in Greenland as part of these ongoing military Arctic training exercises that Denmark, of course, along with -- along with Finland, along with France, along with Germany, along with the Netherlands, along with Norway, along with Sweden, along with the U.K., those are the countries that are being targeted by these tariffs.
And the joint statement says that President Trump threatens to undermine the transatlantic security, risks putting the relationship on a downward spiral.
And they say they stand squarely behind Denmark and the people of Greenland in determining their future, that they will continue and are willing to continue as they have done in conversations about Greenland.
[00:05:06]
But based on its sovereignty or based on the respect of sovereignty and territorial integrity, which very clearly, they feel President Trump is not doing at the moment.
So, that pushback from those countries is very clear. And that discussion with E.U. ambassadors was discussing some incredibly disruptive potential measures: stopping, potentially, the E.U.-U.S. trade deal, which would leave tariffs in place on U.S. goods coming into Europe, would damage trade and the economies of both Europe and the United States.
But an even bigger mechanism tool that has never been used before, the sort of so-called nuclear option, the anti-coercion measures that Europe, the European Union, all those nations could bring to bear on the United States, that would potentially put costs on -- on any Amazon transaction, on any -- any Visa or Mastercard transaction. Incredibly wide ranging and economically damaging.
So, the Europeans reaching, as they say, to their toolbox of what they can do to talk economics and economic power To President Trump. and this is the biggest division, if you will, that I think the E.U. has seen with the U.S. In recent history.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SANDOVAL: And it's not all opposition. In fact, some U.S. Republican lawmakers say that they are in favor of cutting a deal with Denmark in order to annex Greenland.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. JOHN CORNYN (R-TX): Well, Greenland is strategically located, as you know, and as the Chinese and the Russians have been increasingly active in the Arctic, otherwise known as the High North. I think the president rightly understands this is a strategically important piece of real estate.
But Greenland and -- and the Danes have been our allies for a long time now.
The president is the consummate dealmaker, and I think he's looking for a deal. Sometimes he believes in strategic ambiguity and -- and talks in terms that get people -- get people's attention. But ultimately, I think there's a deal to be made.
And I'm glad that Secretary Rubio and the vice president have been engaging the Danes, because this is something we should be able to do in the best interests of both countries.
REP. MIKE TURNER (R-OH): There certainly are national security issues. And the president having identified as with respect to the fact that this is the Golden Dome and that there are locations that are going to be necessary with respect to the operations of Golden Dome, is absolutely an essential issue. And the Golden Dome is going to be very, very important.
We have other locations that are essential, critical infrastructure overall, where -- that we don't own. And I think, certainly, Greenland and the Greenlanders need to -- to, you know, decide their future and their outcome.
I think this is more of an issue of asking them to join us, as opposed to art of the deal.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANDOVAL: So, that's some of the support this Sunday for the president's plan. But there are also Republicans strongly against forcing the acquisition of Greenland, whether it's through the military or by -- really, by any other means.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. RAND PAUL (R-KY): On the war powers or on militarily invading Greenland, I've heard of no Republican support for that. Even the most hawkish members of our caucus have said they won't support that. So, I think it's going to be very difficult.
I think he keeps rattling the cage saying that. But as far as trying to buy it peacefully, you don't get purchasers to come around by berating them and telling them you'll take it anyway.
REP. MIKE MCCAUL (R-TX): Threats. So, if he wants to purchase Greenland, that's one thing. But for him to militarily invade would turn Article V of NATO on its very head and, in essence, put us at war with NATO itself.
It would end up abolishing NATO as we know it, an organization that has lasted for over four to five decades and protected us from world wars.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANDOVAL: Joining me now to unpack all of this is CNN European affairs commentator Dominic Thomas.
Dominic, it's great to see you again.
DOMINIC THOMAS, CNN EUROPEAN AFFAIRS COMMENTATOR: Thanks for having for having me on, Polo. SANDOVAL: So, if this is more than just cage rattling, as the Kentucky
senator just described it, if President Trump's threat to take Greenland materializes, are there zero scenarios in which NATO, which is now nearly 77 years old, in which that alliance survives?
THOMAS: It would seem completely, you know, impossible, Polo. It's -- it's built and protected by its various articles to precisely avoid that. It's unprecedented. So, ultimately, we don't know.
But given the energy that President Trump has put, in the last few years, into pushing NATO members to contribute, to enhance the role and their commitment, and demonstrably show that commitment to NATO, I think that that question of survivability is, of course, raised.
[00:10:04]
But beyond that, the question of weaponizing tariffs and so on against these allies as a path forward for occupying sovereign territory is really what NATO and NATO members are finding so incredibly problematic here, Polo.
SANDOVAL: And then there's, of course, the "what would happen next." So, if we do see a takeover of Greenland; if the most powerful member of NATO were to do the exact thing that the alliance is designed to prevent, as you just pointed out, what options do, then, the European members have?
THOMAS: Yes. Well, I mean, I think at the moment, what's happening is we have an administration, Trump administration that is clearly emboldened by Operation Absolute Resolve. But Venezuela is not NATO. It's not Europe, and it's not the European Union. And there's a clear red line here that has been crossed.
And what's interesting is that European citizens have absolutely no interest in Greenland becoming the 51st state of the U.S. They've been vocal about this. And European leaders are, of course, answerable to them.
They've spent the past year accommodating President Trump, trying to work with him over various deals, trying to maintain his commitment to conflict between Russia and Ukraine. And invading a member of the NATO alliance sends a very wrong message in the broader context of the sustainable peace accord and the deterrence that these allies are trying to -- are trying to achieve here.
What's so problematic about this is it's not just the invasion. It's the rhetoric of war that President Trump has been employing, designating, essentially, an enemy that is an ally since post-World War II; and then subsequently, through membership of NATO, through what are essentially tariff attacks.
And I think that's what's so particularly problematic at this stage and, therefore, complicates the path forward, should they decide to make a military incursion into Greenland.
SANDOVAL: And, Dominic, I'm glad you mentioned Venezuela. I know you've previously shared with us that it's quite possible that President Trump could perhaps feel emboldened by the actions in Venezuela earlier this year. I'm curious if you can maybe expand on -- on that.
THOMAS: Well, first of all, we're talking here about not somebody with whom there is a -- an asymmetrical relationship, as there was with Venezuela. We're talking about Europe here. We're talking about the European Union with a massive trade sector.
And let's not forget that the current deal between the United States and the European Union was accelerated and is now stalled to avoid a trade war. So, once again, this kind of rhetoric of conflict and so on.
President Trump cannot bully Europe in the way that he has bullied Venezuela or is talking about in other countries here. Europeans don't want it. NATO members don't want it.
What they are interested in, and are willing to work with him, is on a security deal or some kind of greater or enhanced program of security in the Arctic.
But as you mentioned earlier, as they deployed troops there last week, they were met with a -- an aggressive response from the U.S. president, which I think underlines that that is not his interest. His interest in securing control of the critical minerals. And that is absolutely a red line. That cannot be crossed. And it sends a very wrong message globally to other countries such as Russia.
And that's a concern for Europe that's on the front lines of all of these conflicts to the East with Russia and on the other side, now it looks like, with the United States.
SANDOVAL: What about the United States, in the eyes of the world? Obviously, the president showing no sign of backing down, despite some strong opposition both in and outside of the United States.
How do you think this risk is -- is really -- or how is this risk flipping the perception of the U.S. around the world, given what we've seen just in recent weeks?
THOMAS: Yes, President Trump has been, and his administration, have been effective with messaging and communication and in particularly the ways in which they've disseminated their message through disruptive far-right political parties in places like Europe and elsewhere.
And over certain questions, there's a sort of a Venn diagram of understanding of actions that have been taken, whether justified or not, when it comes to immigration and so on and so forth.
As they observe unfolding on global media networks, social media platforms, and so on, internal protests and resistance to these policies in the United States, alongside a fatigue over conflict between Russia and Ukraine.
[00:15:14]
And as they see the ways in which this foreign policy is now being implemented, they got to read the security agreement. But seeing that President Trump will not stop with these incursions, and they are now impacting Europeans on their -- on their territory, in this particular case. And I think that raises concerns elsewhere in the world about what the next steps will look like.
And I think that the vocal protests abroad are indicative of this will to resist President Trump after this last year of uncertainty and unpredictability.
SANDOVAL: Dominic Thomas, always grateful to have your analysis. Thank you so much for staying up late for us.
THOMAS: Thank you, Polo
SANDOVAL: Of course.
And some Greenlanders are certainly taking this threat quite serious. In fact, survival gear, it has become a hot commodity in Greenland as locals worry about the possibility of military action.
Sales of items like camping stoves, freeze-dried meals, they -- and also some -- some dried foods. Well, those sales are up. Protesters in Greenland's capital, they expressed their frustrations with Donald Trump and also the instability that he has brought to their lives.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PARNUNA OLSEN, PROTESTOR: I live in danger. I also don't get so much sleep because in all the news there, I see this about Donald Trump wants to buy Greenland. And Greenland is not for sale, and we will never be for sale.
JANE, PROTESTOR: Stomachache. Nervousness. What is this going to end? Because I know he -- he want revenge. And he's -- I don't know any nice words about him.
MALIK DOLLERUK SEHEBEL, PROTESTOR: I have -- completely lost for words for what he's doing now. It's just completely insane.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANDOVAL: I want to get you to a developing story now.
At least 21 people are dead after two high-speed trains derailed in Southern Spain. Authorities say that a train traveling from Malaga to Madrid derailed, crossing onto an adjacent track, where it caused the second trail [SIC] -- trail [SIC] to actually derail.
So, according to the train company, about 300 passengers were on board that first train. Officials say at least 73 people were injured.
Emergency crews are on the scene right now, and some train service in the region has been suspended as a result of this. And still to come here on CNN NEWSROOM, Minnesota's National Guard
says that it's ready to protect the peace and protesters. And this as the Pentagon orders 1,500 active-duty soldiers to prepare for a possible deployment.
So, what could a double deployment look like on the streets in parts of Minnesota? I'll ask an expert.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[00:21:49]
SANDOVAL: Some frigid temperatures, they're not keeping some Minnesotans from assembling for anti-ICE protests even late into the night. Demonstrations, those continued on Sunday.
And this against the presence of thousands of federal officers who have been conducting immigration raids and arresting people throughout the city of Minneapolis.
Well, now the Pentagon has ordered about 1,500 active-duty soldiers to prepare for possible deployments to the state. And even that mere preparation, well, that seems to be amping the tensions even higher.
In a statement, Minnesota's National Guard said that it, too, is preparing; that it's staged and ready to support local law enforcement in protecting life, property, and, quote, "the rights of all Minnesotans to assemble peacefully."
Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey is condemning the possible deployment of federal active-duty soldiers.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MAYOR JACOB FREY (D), MINNESOTA: This act was clearly designed to intimidate the people of Minneapolis. And here's the thing: we're not going to be intimidated.
If the goal here is safety, we've got many mechanisms to achieve safety. And the best way to get safety is not to have an influx of even more agents and, in this case, military in Minneapolis.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANDOVAL: CNN's Julia Vargas Jones and her team have been in Minneapolis braving that cold weather, speaking to protesters. They filed this report as darkness was settling in on Sunday.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
JULIA VARGAS JONES, CNN CORRESPONDENT: The chilling temperatures are not deterring protesters from coming here outside the Whipple Federal Building. We're still seeing people showing up as the night begins to fall.
Now, I just recently spoke to a protester who said he was about to go buy a tent and some heaters for people who were planning to spend the night here.
Some changes have taken place. I just want to show you what these barricades look like. This is new. This wasn't here before this weekend. It appeared on Sunday.
These barricades are seeming to be able to keep protesters on the sidewalk, which has been a main concern of the federal agents inside the Whipple Federal Building. They had at times been clashing with protesters as they were trying to clear the street and keep them clear for their vehicles.
But now -- now being aided by the sheriff's department, the Hennepin Sheriff's Department here. Quite a few vehicles, some of them controlling traffic and keeping things in order here.
Now, on Friday, a federal judge had determined that these federal agents can no longer use pepper spray, tear gas, and other chemical agents to disperse a peaceful crowd. They also determined that they could not make arrests during a peaceful protest or stop cars without a reasonable suspicion.
Now, those restrictions will not apply to the sheriff's deputies that are present here. So, that is an important distinction to make.
As we go into Monday, the frigid temperatures very clearly not deterring Minnesotans, some of them telling us that they're here because they don't want -- they simply do not want ICE in Minneapolis. They don't want ICE in Minnesota. They definitely do not want more troops being sent to their state.
But echoing also the words of local leaders like Democratic mayor of Minneapolis Jacob Frey and the governor of Minnesota, Tim Walz, saying that bringing those troops here would only lead to an escalation of tensions in an already volatile place.
[00:20:16]
Julia Vargas Jones, CNN, Minneapolis.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SANDOVAL: All right, let's get some expert analysis now. Joining us is CNN national security analyst Juliette Kayyem. She's also a former assistant secretary with the Department of Homeland Security, as well as a Harvard professor.
Juliette, great to see you.
JULIETTE KAYYEM, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Thank you for having me.
SANDOVAL: So, the Pentagon is putting hundreds of active troops on standby for possible deployment while the state's governor is saying that they're mobilizing a National Guard force. Again, this is strictly just to be prepared. Hypothetically speaking, I mean, what happens if these military
personnel are simultaneously deployed? I mean, could we see a scenario where state troops are federalized?
KAYYEM: We could and -- or we could even, I think, more scarily, find two sets of troops under two types of commands. The National Guard reporting to the governor, the -- the active military, if the president decides to deploy them, reporting to him.
When I -- when we say that we live in unprecedented times, this for -- for America, for the United States would be unprecedented.
Because generally, when the military is deployed in the United States, it is -- generally serves in a support function for -- for a community, if something's going wrong. And in the past, when the president -- when a president has deployed federalized troops, it's because the state has violated a Supreme Court order to desegregate.
We've never seen just the deployment of troops simply as a -- as a sort of counter to the criticisms that the -- the White House has of the governor and the mayor.
SANDOVAL: What is your sense of ICE's mission in Minneapolis right now? I mean, does it seem to have shifted away from what was supposed to be the initial intention, which was enforce immigration actions?
KAYYEM: Yes. I mean, there can be no question about it. And here's the absolute crazy thing about what's going on. Donald Trump is deporting fewer people than Joe Biden did at this stage.
And only 5 percent of the people that he is deporting have violent criminal convictions. About less than 40 percent have some sort of criminal conviction.
So, this is now something different than effective immigration -- you know, deportation, which anyone in homeland security is for.
This is about the deployment of sort of fake troops, as we see they've -- they're -- they're in military garb. They're masked. You know, it's deployment to essentially command communities. Ask people who they are, ask about accents. Violent, violent interactions with the public.
This is not about immigration anymore. It's not even about sort of law enforcement anymore. It has the feel of a -- of a sort of, you know, terror campaign against the -- against the city, not just against immigrants.
SANDOVAL: Yes. Critics of the administration have described it as theatrics.
And I do want to go back briefly to this possible troop deployment, if we do get to that point.
KAYYEM: Yes.
SANDOVAL: I mean, it is just the unprecedented nature of, you know, when you imagine you have ICE and Border Patrol, federal agents, potentially state troops mobilized, possibly also Army units sent in by the Pentagon. If we get to that point, I mean, what could the streets look like?
KAYYEM: Yes. So, I know Minnesota National Guard is now saying that they're telling the community, our people, right, the National Guard are wearing, you know, the sort of traffic vests, the yellow or orange vests, and that they aren't masked.
And they are saying that to say this is how we're distinguishing them from these -- these not -- these guys in camouflage who are masked. They're not identifying themselves as immigration enforcement officials, and they're just going around the streets.
Now, you have those two camps. You could have an overlay of active military. We don't quite know what that would look like.
But -- but as you suggest, this -- there's been no planning. There's been no scenarios around this. There's like -- this is -- this is a danger for not just the community, but for the law enforcement and military that are all being deployed without rules of engagement or -- or a known mission at this stage.
SANDOVAL: Juliette, I have about a minute left with you. When it comes to possible de-escalation, if the White House wished to cool temperatures down in Minneapolis on the streets, while at the same time enforcing immigration actions, as we've seen from previous administrations, I mean, what should the administration do?
[00:30:10]
KAYYEM: Well, you're starting to hear the administration suggest they're looking for an off-ramp. I do think they're threatening the military. And maybe tomorrow the president does claim the Insurrection Act.
But I noticed today on television, the Sunday shows, that they really did leave Secretary Noem, secretary of homeland security, sort of out on her own.
You're starting to hear reporting, including from us, that -- that they're seeing the polling, essentially. They are seeing that the American public does not like this. It's not just Democrats. It's not just progressives. It is -- it is Republicans and moderates, as well.
SANDOVAL: Juliette Kayyem helping us look ahead into what may potentially be another eventful week in the state of Minnesota.
KAYYEM: Yes.
SANDOVAL: Appreciate your time and your analysis.
KAYYEM: Thank you.
SANDOVAL: Well, still to come on CNN NEWSROOM, the U.S. has a long history with Greenland concerning national security. How an agreement signed by President Truman back in 1951 could impact today's diplomacy. That and more.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANDOVAL: Hey, welcome back. I'm Polo Sandoval here in New York. Let's take a look at today's top stories.
European allies, they are uniting in the face of President Trump's latest tariff threats. NATO secretary-general and the British prime minister, they both held calls with the U.S. president over his escalating pursuit of Greenland.
And also, E.U. ambassadors, they held an emergency meeting on Sunday to discuss how to respond to Trump's new 10 percent levies, which are set to take effect on February the 1st.
[00:35:00]
The Pentagon has ordered some 1,500 active-duty soldiers to stand by for a possible deployment to the state of Minnesota. Meanwhile, state leaders, they are condemning the move, saying that it's clearly designed to intimidate Minnesotans amid anti-ICE protests.
Well, they have also mobilized Minnesota's National Guard troops to support local law enforcement and to, quote, "protect Minnesotans' right to peacefully protest."
Wildfires in Southern Chile, they have -- in Chile, they have killed at least 18 people and forced more than 20,000 from their homes.
Chile's president has declared a state of catastrophe in two regions, where the largest fires seem to be burning.
Authorities say that strong winds and high temperatures are fueling these flames.
All right. Now to public sentiment about these -- this evolving Greenland situation. A recent CNN poll found that the vast majority of Americans seem to be against the U.S. attempt to take control of Greenland.
The survey found that 75 percent of those people who were polled oppose, and only 25 percent of adults support that as a possibility.
And this shows that President Donald Trump's push to expand American territory faces some steep resistance, even from Republicans, who seem to be fairly divided, 50/50.
Meanwhile, a whopping 94 percent of Democrats and those who lean Democratic oppose that potential takeover.
Greenland's proximity to Russia, it has long been seen by the U.S. as having strategic importance for the military, especially during the Cold War.
The U.S. first signed an agreement with Denmark to station troops on the Arctic island. This happened back in 1951 under President Truman. Well, that agreement, that continues to allow the U.S. to maintain a
military presence there, to whatever extent it deems necessary, as this Republican congressman makes pretty clear.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MCCAUL: We know Greenland has been looked at by presidents since we purchased Alaska. It is very strategic right now from a national security standpoint against China and Russia.
But in 1951, we signed a treaty with Denmark that allows us full access to Greenland to protect Greenland. And this is after World War II. President Truman initially was involved, and then Eisenhower. And the fact is, the president has full military access to Greenland to protect us from any threats.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANDOVAL: All right. Let's get some expert analysis now. And joining us is CNN presidential historian and former director of the Nixon Presidential Library, Tim Naftali. Tim, it is wonderful to see you again.
TIM NAFTALI, CNN PRESIDENTIAL HISTORIAN: Nice seeing you, Polo.
SANDOVAL: So, let me get your immediate reaction to the current situation when it comes to Greenland. President Trump's ambitions to take that territory, even willing to wage yet another trade war over it, apparently.
Is there any moment in history that you can compare this to? I mean, how unprecedented is this?
NAFTALI: Well, it's not unprecedented for the United States to want to purchase territory. We've done it -- we've -- on five occasions we acquired substantial amounts of territory through purchase.
Most of the time, we purchase things from people who want to sell it to us. The Russians wanted to sell us Alaska. The French wanted to sell us Louisiana. The Danes wanted to sell us the Virgin Islands.
In a couple of cases, we forced people to sell things to us. But that was in the 19th Century. We forced the Spanish to -- to do a deal with us for West Florida. And we forced the Mexicans to sell us what would become Southern Arizona and Southern New Mexico.
We did that under force, but that we did that a long time ago. We did it before we became a great power. We did it before we became a superpower.
So, the kinds of activities that the president is engaging in are not unheard of in American history. It's just modern American leaders have never done it.
SANDOVAL: I mean, I'm curious what you also make of the way the president is going about this. Yes. Your earlier point, we have seen other circumstances in the past.
Here, however, he seems to be using this emergency powers to impose those tariffs, something that is currently under review by the Supreme Court. Though his treasury secretary says that it's unlikely it will be overturned.
NAFTALI: Well, let's -- let's keep in mind how dangerous this moment is.
This is not just an issue of whether the president is using an economic power that rightly only belongs to the Congress. This is a question about the president of the United States, on his own -- because there are many in Congress on his side of the aisle who don't agree with him -- who is saying that the country needs, for national security purposes, a territory that belongs not only to an ally but to a member of NATO.
Thus, in a sense, triggering a NATO reaction to a threat to NATO; in this case, a threat to NATO by a member of NATO. There is no precedent for that.
[00:40:08]
And frankly, it's a much bigger question than whether or not he has the constitutional right to use tariffs to threaten countries.
The issue now is whether the president of the United States singlehandedly can destroy a treaty that was ratified by Congress, that has been at the heart of our international security system since the late 1940s.
SANDOVAL: Right. And just on that, I mean, that has been, obviously, the source of so much criticism we've even heard from Republicans, with Michael, with Michael McCaul saying that a U.S. invasion of Greenland, it would mean war with NATO.
Do you remember in that nearly 77-year history of that alliance, do you remember it facing such an existential threat?
NAFTALI: No, because NATO stood by us after 9/11.
SANDOVAL: Yes.
NAFTALI: NATO forces worked alongside our forces in Afghanistan.
Yes, there were some disagreement among NATO countries regarding Iraq, but a number of -- a number of the NATO countries provided us with forces or at least assistance.
The point is, NATO has stood by us when we were threatened. And now, a member of NATO is being threatened by a superpower. And unfortunately, it's our White House that's doing the threatening.
But let's make it clear that there is no argument that our government has given us to substantiate that there is a national security threat posed by the Danish administration of autonomous Greenland. SANDOVAL: We talked about the reaction from European leaders. But then
there's also the American public in general.
A recent CNN poll showing that 75 percent -- 75 percent -- of adults saying that they oppose the U.S. taking control of Greenland.
In a midterm year, Tim, how much of a concern should that be -- not necessarily that it is -- but should it be for the president and for his fellow Republicans?
NAFTALI: The president of the United States is worried about the midterms. It's clear. He's told us that he's worried, and he's also acted like a leader who is worried.
But the president won't do what he needs to do to recapture American trust in his management of the economy.
Eliminating the tariffs is the step towards bringing down interest rates, not threatening the Fed.
And if he wants peace and security and to keep America strong, you don't go around threatening your allies. After all, the people to threaten are your adversaries.
We've been awfully nice to -- to Russia. And if you compare how we treat Russia, it's very different from how we treat Denmark. And Denmark is our friend, and Russia is trying to scramble the international system.
SANDOVAL: Yes. Hence, the tremendous risk of flipping perception around the world of the United States.
Tim Naftali, as always, tremendously grateful for your assessment. Appreciate it.
NAFTALI: Good night, Polo.
SANDOVAL: Iran's president warning that the U.S. -- warning the U.S. that any aggression directed towards its supreme leader will be seen as a declaration of, quote, "all-out war against Iran."
And that warning comes after U.S. President Donald Trump suggested Iran looked for new leadership different from Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
Well, the supreme leader called Mr. Trump a criminal over his support of recent anti-government protests in Iran. One human rights group reporting that more than 3,600 demonstrators have been killed in just the last three weeks.
President Trump maintains that the killing was stopped, but a spokesperson for Iran's judiciary suggested that many detained protesters could still face execution.
Well, the United States has completely withdrawn all of its forces from military facilities within Iraq's federal territory. Iraq's defense ministry announcing that troop withdrawal on Sunday, noting that the final contingent of U.S. advisers had departed the al-Assad Airbase in Western Iraq after more than two decades there.
U.S. troops still remain in Kurdish regions in Northern Iraq. Iraq's central government does not have full control over that region.
Still -- still to come here on CNN NEWSROOM, new data showing China met its goal to grow their economy in 2025. But the country's low birth rate, that is giving officials some concern over the fourth -- over the situation there. More details after a short break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[00:47:43]
SANDOVAL: China's government reporting that the country met its economic growth target for 2025, despite a trade war with the United States.
The National Bureau of Statistics, though, also revealing China's birth rate. It hit a new record low.
Let's head straight to Beijing, where CNN's Mike Valerio is standing by with much, much more. Mike, great to see you.
So, what does a shrinking population mean for the world's second largest economy?
MIKE VALERIO, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: It could spell trouble, Polo, for what China's behemoth economy looks like in the decades to come.
I know that sometimes these numbers can be Snoozeville, but let's get into them, because they are quite compelling when you're talking about relations with the United States, the second biggest economy on earth.
What falling number of babies could mean for that critical economic dynamic.
So, when we put up the numbers, 5 percent growth in GDP for 2025. That is certainly on target; what officials from Beijing hoped would happen.
And that is driven largely through exports: China sending goods overseas on overdrive, trying to compensate for a loss of its market in the United States, when we're talking about the stability that it once enjoyed before the trade wars of the first and now the second Trump administration.
But when we dig deeper into the numbers and talk about the lowest birth rate on record that China has recorded, released just a couple hours ago, earlier this morning.
The "why we care" factor as we look at these numbers here is because fewer babies born today potentially means slower growth, weaker consumer demand, and a shrinking workforce ahead. Certainly, not good when you're talking about keeping the engines on full-steam ahead for the world's second largest economy. So, 7.92 million babies born, offset by 11.31 million deaths. That has
amounted to China's shrinking population. Not an outlier figure, but shrinking for the fourth year in a row. Overall, fell by 3.4 million people.
So, when you have China's workforce shrinking today, its population aging -- population aging rapidly, statistics show nearly 1 in 4 people here in this country are over the age of 60, according to the United Nations.
[00:50:02]
When you take that further through to conclusion by the end of the century, you could have about half of China's population over the age of 60.
And then you think, what does that do for the able-bodied people who are able to go into factories and the workforce? It certainly is not good.
So, the question then moves, what is this town here in Beijing, what are local governments trying to do to fix the problem?
Simplified marriage registration processes, tax breaks, housing subsidies, extended -- extended maternity leave.
But what we hear when we traverse the country, Polo, certainly what is reported by our fellow colleagues and across our reporting from CNN, is that a lot of young people say that these measures to make it easier to have a child are not enough.
It's super expensive to live in many of these cities in China; that housing costs job insecurity really weigh on the population.
So, certainly, a huge dynamic to take note of when we're talking about this economy, Polo.
SANDOVAL: And huge context to keep in mind. As always, Mike Valerio, appreciate all your reporting, live from Beijing.
Still ahead here on CNN NEWSROOM, mopeds and cars navigating Rome's narrow streets. They will now have to slow down. Even if you're a tourist. Just ahead, we'll tell you about the city's new speed limit and the mixed reaction to that change.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[00:55:12]
SANDOVAL: Rome has now become the latest European capital to reduce its speed limit. This move aims to tackle pollution and also lower the number of accidents in a city where streets are usually pretty packed with cars and tourists.
CNN's Barbie Latza Nadeau with those details.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BARBIE LATZA NADEAU, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The streets of Rome can feel like an obstacle course: a chaotic mix of cars, scooters and pedestrians buzzing through the city's ancient, narrow streets.
But Rome is trying to curb the whirlwind pace of some of its drivers, cutting the speed limit in the historic center almost in half: from 50 to 30 kilometers per hour. The slowdown is an effort to reduce accidents and pollution, and it's dividing opinions in the Eternal City.
SANTI CAUTELA, ROME RESIDENT (through translator): In my opinion, it is wrong. Thirty kilometers per hour is too little. Fifty was fine.
BARBARA BARATTOLO, ROME RESIDENT (through translator): Some people drive extremely fast. I ride a scooter and often risk being hit. For pedestrians and bicycle safety, too, it's better to go slowly.
NADEAU (voice-over): And just as Rome wasn't built in a day, the city's transport chief says drivers have about a month to gear down, with the new rules gradually being enforced over the next 30 days.
Other cities like London, Brussels, and Paris have imposed similar speed limits. Officials in the Northern Italian city of Bologna say a similar measure reduced road accidents by 13 percent and fatalities by 50 percent in the year after it was enacted.
And besides the expectation of saving lives, local authorities say the lower speed limit is also expected to reduce noise levels in the city center by around two decibels. A lot to gain by slowing down, though some people say the need for speed could be a hard habit to break.
Barbie Latza Nadeau, CNN, Rome.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SANDOVAL: Really appreciate you joining us the last hour of news. I'm Polo Sandoval in New York. I'll join you again with another hour of CNN NEWSROOM after a short break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[01:00:00]
