Return to Transcripts main page

Early Start with Rahel Solomon

UK PM Speaks Out As Trump's Tariff Threaten NATO Allies. Aired 4:30-5a ET

Aired January 19, 2026 - 4:30   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[04:30:00]

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

KEIR STARMER, BRITISH PRIME MINISTER: Fairness, the conditions that keep prices down, jobs secure and economies resilient. That is what active government looks like in an age of uncertainty. Steady at home, engaged abroad, and always focused on protecting the people that we serve.

Britain is a pragmatic country. We look for agreement. We believe in partnership. We prefer solutions to slogans, and we will not indulge in commentary and gesture politics that harm the British people.

But being pragmatic does not mean being passive, and partnership does not mean abandoning principle. That is why it's important to be clear about who we stand with, what we stand for and where our interests lie.

Now, this is a moment for the whole country to pull together. So I warmly welcome the support we've had with regards to Greenland and the proposed tariffs from the leader of the opposition. I thank her for her support.

At moments like this, there will always be people who reach for the performative, who think angry social media post or grandstanding is a substitute for hard work. That's an understandable instinct, but it's not effective. It never has been. It may make politicians feel good, but it does nothing for working people whose jobs, livelihoods and security are rely on the relationships that we build across the world.

So, to conclude, we will work with our allies in Europe, across NATO and with the United States. We will keep dialogue open, we will defend international law, and we will use the full strength of government at home and abroad to protect the security and living standards and future of the British people. That is the approach I will take as Prime Minister, and that is the responsibility that this moment demands. Thank you.

I'm now going to take some questions and I've got a fairly extensive list, you'll be pleased to know. I'm going to start, Chris, with Chris Mason from BBC News.

CHRIS MASON, BBC NEWS POLITICAL EDITOR: Thank you. Prime Minister. Chris Mason, BBC News. This is clearly incredibly difficult. What more in specific terms, can you tell us about what you plan to do now? It appears that you're ruling out retaliatory tariffs in the UK can you confirm that? And would you consider going to see President Trump face to face this week? Thank you.

STARMER: Well, what I'm going to do now is to focus on our national interests and be absolutely clear that that requires us to be clear about the principles that we apply to a situation like this. In particular, that the future of Greenland is for Greenland and the Denmark Kingdom, and that tariffs should not be used against allies in this way.

In relation to the escalation, look, a tariff war is in nobody's interests and we have not got to that stage. And my focus, therefore is making sure we don't get to that stage. And that's what I'm doing at the moment. Thank you, Chris. Beth, can I come to you?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Thank you. Prime Minister, many people watching this at home would have been shocked and angry over the weekend that our so called closest ally is threatening us if we try to stop him illegally annexing Greenland. Is this the most serious crisis in the transatlantic relationship decades?

And how can the U.S. remain our closest ally when it's bullying us like this? And just on tariffs, you say they are completely wrong and it will hurt the British economy. But if Trump does go ahead, to be clear, are you telling the British people that we will have to take that economic pain and are you planning retaliatory tariffs if that happens? Thank you.

STARMER: Well, thank you, Beth. And firstly, to underscore your point, this has been very badly received across the United Kingdom. We're allies of the United States and we work closely with them. And therefore, I'm not surprised by the reaction that's been across the United Kingdom. And it is a very serious situation.

Our job is to ensure that we find a way forward consistent with our principles and our values and consistent with our national interest. The U.S. remains a close ally on defense on security and on intelligence, on nuclear capability. We work very closely with the United States and we must never lose sight of our national interest in that. But we must stand up for our values.

[04:35:08]

We must be clear about the principles that we are applying here, and we'll continue to do so. On the question of tariffs, a tariff war isn't in anybody's interests, and therefore, what I want to do is to avoid a tariff war, because it will be businesses, workers and families across the country that will be hit by a trade war. And therefore, I will do as I've set out, which is to engage with our European allies, with President Trump.

And, Chris, in response to the second part of your question, I spoke to President Trump yesterday, as I think you all know, and I'll no doubt speak to him again in coming days continually. Our offices talk all the time. But we must find a pragmatic, sensible, sustained way through this that avoids some of the consequences that will be very serious for our country. Thank you very much, Beth. Robert Peston.

ROBERT PESTON, ITV POLITICAL EDITOR: Robert Peston, ITV. Prime Minister, your entire approach is predicated on the idea that Donald Trump is amenable to reason and respects the rule of law. But it's plainly clear that neither of those assumptions are true. So when will you consider some kind of economic retaliation through tariffs? And will you talk to the monarch, to the king, about not going to America to celebrate 250 years since independence?

STARMER: Well, Robert, this is a serious situation, and as I've said, threatening tariffs on allies is the wrong thing to do, completely wrong. And a trade war is not in our interests. And therefore, my first task is to ensure we don't get to that place, which is what I'm focused on at the moment and will continue to focus on.

In relation to wider issues, I don't want to lose sight of the central goal here, which is to avoid the seriousness that a trade war would bring. In relation to your broader point, we do have to remember at all times that it is our national interest that we continue to work with the Americans when it comes to defense, to security and to intelligence. Our nuclear deterrent is our foremost weapon and deterrent when it comes to securing the safety of everybody in the United Kingdom.

It's my primary duty, and that requires us to have a good relationship with the United States. But it doesn't mean, as I said a moment ago, that we pretend we don't have differences. We do have differences. And I've set out some of those differences here this morning in relation to Greenland, differences of opinion in terms of who should decide the future of Greenland. I'm very clear in my position in that. And differences of opinion on the use of tariffs in a situation like this.

And again, I've been very clear saying they're completely wrong. So we apply our values and we seek a solution that's in our national interest. Thank you, Robert. Chris Hope.

CHRIS HOPE, GB NEWS POLITICAL EDITOR: Chris Hope, GB News. Prime Minister, Donald Trump says he no longer feels an obligation to think purely of peace. Is now the moment you must choose between the U.S. and the EU. Is this a fracturing in your special relationship?

STARMER: Firstly, I don't think it's right for us to choose between the U.S. and Europe. That's not a new position today. That's the position I've consistently held, as have previous governments, because we are allies with our European partners and allies with the U.S., and the strength in being able to keep both those alliances has served us well over the last 80 years. So this is not a moment to sort of choose one between the other.

I have argued, and this is not an argument for the first time today, and I've spoken to European allies and leaders about the need for Europe to step up and do more in its own Defense and Security. I feel that over many years, we've not paid enough attention to what we European nations can and should do in our own defense. And this reinforces why it's important that we do that in Defense and Security. And Defense and Security these days, of course, includes energy and resilience and cyber, as well as the traditional Defense and Security.

Europe has to step up into that space, and that's an argument I've been leading on and making for a number of months now with our European partners, and we'll continue to do so. Thank you, Chris. I've got Gary Gibbon from Channel 4. Gary?

GARY GIBBON, CHANNEL 4 NEWS POLITICAL EDITOR: Thank you, Prime Minister. You say that Donald Trump remains an ally, but a lot of people would look at his behaviors and say he's not remotely behaving like an ally. Is there anything he could do that would make you think he was no longer an ally? Or is it just unthinkable we totally locked in?

[04:40:01]

And just one other, if I may, some puzzlement that those forces quite limited military personnel that went to Greenland, that he interpreted that as a hostile act. Do you have any sense that he might have been misinformed about that in entire expedition?

STARMER: Well, taking the second bit first, if I may, that is one of the things I discussed with President Trump yesterday in relation to those forces which were clearly there to assess and work on risk from the Russians. And so there's real clarity, I hope, about that in relation to the relationship. We must never lose sight of the fact that on defense, security, intelligence and nuclear capability, we work very closely with our U.S. allies, and it's in our national interest to continue to do so.

That doesn't mean pretending we don't have differences. And I don't think anybody could say, suggest I'm pretending we don't have differences. I'm spelling out what those differences are, what our principles and values are and how we approach them. But we do continue to work with the Americans. The situation in the Middle East is fragile. There is a ceasefire.

We need to move to phase two. We mustn't lose sight of that. In Ukraine, we've been striving for a just and lasting peace for a long time now. We're four years into that conflict. It is in our interest to work with others and to bring about that just and lasting peace.

The last thing we should do is to simply throw all that away and pretend that it doesn't matter anymore. It does matter, but we don't do that by pretending we haven't got differences. We do have differences, and I'm spelling them out here this morning. Thank you very much, Gary. I've got Kitty Donaldson from iNews. Kitty.

KITTY DONALDSON, iPAPER CHIEF POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Thank you, Prime Minister. The U.S. supreme Court is due to rule next week on whether the tax tariffs are legal for the president to use. Do you think it's worth just biding your time until next week? And secondly, I don't think you answered Robert's question, which was, do you think the king should go to the United States this year?

STARMER: I'm not going to comment on the Supreme Court ruling. I think it's due out reasonably soon. But I don't think it would be sensible to simply wait for the court. It's really important that we act now in response to the threat of tariffs. And that's why I spoke to President Trump yesterday and to numerous allies across Europe, many leaders during the course of yesterday afternoon, Secretary General of NATO, and will continue to do so today because it's in all our interests to act swiftly in relation to this matter.

Look in relation to the King and other issues. As I said in my speech, I'm focused on the pragmatic response here, not the suggestion of others. And my focus is on what's in the national interest for our country, what is going to best protect workers, families, businesses. And I believe that's the approach that I've set out. Thank you, Kitty. I've got Craig Munro from the Metro.

CRAIG MUNRO, METRO SENIOR POLITICAL REPORTER: Craig Munro from Metro. You spoke about the cost of living in your speech there. How can you. How can you reassure people that cost of living will improve in the UK when our economic picture is so reliant on an unreliable ally in an unstable global world?

STARMER: By taking the approach that I've set out today, some people appear to make the argument that what happens internationally is irrelevant to the cost of living issues that are faced across this country. I'm well aware that for all the volatility in the world, and we've seen plenty of that in the first few weeks of this year, the issue that is of central concern to families and communities across the country is the cost of living. Wherever you go in the country and ask people what their number one concern is, they will say it's the cost of living and therefore we have to address it.

We address it in a number of ways. Firstly, by taking the measures to stabilize the economy so that inflation coming down, interest rates coming down and protecting family budgets is crucial to that, by being active where markets fail, stepping in on energy bills, rail fares, prescription charges, et cetera. But also by working relentlessly on matters that are international, because the impact of what's happening internationally on what's happening domestically is obvious. It's real. It's probably more direct now than it's been at any time most of us can remember, and therefore it would be to a dereliction of duty on the cost of living, not to be engaged on the international stage.

Thank you very much, Craig. I've got Jason Groves from the Daily Mail. Jason.

JASON GROVES, DAILY MAIL POLITICAL EDITOR: Thanks, PM. Your Danish counterpart says NATO can't survive. One member, the biggest, seizing the territory of another. Do you agree with her? And separately, are you willing to join the President's Board of Peace and are you willing to pay for it?

[04:45:02]

STARMER: Well, look, in relation to the Danish Prime Minister, as you would have anticipated, I spoke to her on Saturday night. I spoke to her again yesterday and made absolutely clear our position on who decides the future of Greenland and the use of tariffs. And we're completely aligned on those issues.

On the question of NATO, it is in all of our interest to make sure that NATO remains strong and stable. We had a very good NATO summit last year with more members than we've had before, with more unity than many people thought we would achieve. And NATO remains the single most effective and successful military alliance the world has ever known. And so it's in all of our interest to make sure that nothing is done to weaken NATO.

On the question of the Board of Peace, look, we're supportive of the measures that are being taken across the Middle East, particularly the ceasefire. I do think we need to press on to phase two. We've indicated our willingness to play our part and we will. And on the border peace, we're talking to allies about the terms of the border peace. Thank you very much, Jason. I've got Lizzy Buchan from the Daily Mail.

LIZZY BUCHAN, DAILY MAIL POLITICAL EDITOR: Thanks, Prime Minister. The head of the UN says that he believes that the U.S. thinks its own power matters more than international law. Do you agree?

And secondly, if I may, you've repeatedly promised to deliver a Hillsborough Law, but the bill was pulled last night. Are you confident you can win back the support of families and can you guarantee it becomes law before the end of the stability.

STARMER: Yes, thank you, Lizzy. Well, in relation to your first point, I've put my argument in my way, in my own words, and that's my approach, rather than sort of commentating on what others have said.

On Hillsborough, as you know, I care hugely that we get this right, that we right the wrongs for very many families who've been let down and ensure a better future for families in the future. In relation to the duty of candor, we've been clear that that matters. What we're now trying to do is just make sure we get the balance right.

When it comes to the application of any principle to the security and intelligence agencies, obviously I have to focus on the national interest. My primary duty as Prime Minister, which is to keep this country safe and secure. That is the duty I hold above all other duties, and I take it really seriously, which is why we're just taking time to make sure we get that balance. Absolutely right.

Thank you, Lizzy. George Parker from the FT. George.

GEORGE PARKER, FT POLITICAL EDITOR: Thank you, Prime Minister. You mentioned in your joint letter the risk of a downward spiral if this issue isn't resolved. I just wondered if you could explain what you meant by that. And linked to that. Do you think it's regrettable that the EU is talking about the possibility of serious trade reprisals and therefore risking a trade war?

STARMER: Firstly, what I meant by the downward spiral is the potential for this to cause huge damage for the UK, whether that's in a trade war or the weakening of alliances, and I do not want to see that happen. That doesn't mean that we put to one side our principles and our values. Quite the contrary, we're very clear about what they are, which is why I wanted to have this press conference this morning and to affirm those principles and values that we apply.

In relation to the EU, look, firstly, we're coordinating very closely with the EU. I spoke to a number of EU leaders last night. I spoke to Ursula von der Leyen last night and intend to do so again either today or tomorrow, so that we're closely aligned. There's proper unity and coordination in our response.

They will decide exactly what they will do next during the course of today and the coming days. But we're working very closely with them, very closely coordinated, and they were among the course that I was engaged on for most of the day yesterday. Thank you, George. And then can I go to Ben Riley-Smith, Telegraph. Ben.

BEN RILEY-SMITH, TELEGRAPH POLITICAL EDITOR: Thank you, Prime Minister. Donald Trump and his team came to military action in Greenland. Do you think that's a genuine possibility?

And secondly, if I may, you are under pressure from some quarters to increase defense spending quicker than you've already planned in the coming years. You yourself are accepting the threat picture is changing most weekly now. Would you consider increasing defense spending quicker than planned?

STARMER: Sorry, the very first bit of your first question. I missed the first question.

RILEY-SMITH: The rejection.

STARMER: Yes. What's the question there?

RILEY-SMITH: Do you think Donald Trump is genuinely considering military action?

STARMER: Look, I don't, actually. I think that this can be resolved and should be resolved through calm discussion, but with the application of the principles and values that I've set out in terms of who decides the future of Greenland and making clear that the use of tariffs in this way is completely wrong.

[04:50:07]

On defense spending, we've obviously set out our plans for this parliament and we made commitments at the NATO summit in relation to going beyond that. We stand by them. I have made the argument that Europe needs to do more on Defense and Security. Partly that is a question of defense spend.

I think European countries are and need to spend more on defense. It's also a question of coordination, collaboration, because it's how we spend what we spend that matters as much as how much we spend. And that's part of the argument I'd be making to European allies.

If the Ukraine war has taught us one thing, it's that by having different capabilities in different countries in different ways, we haven't actually been able to be as effective as we might otherwise have been if we'd coordinated in years gone by. And I think it's really time for Europe to be much more united, much stronger on this issue.

And that's one of the arguments I've been leading on and making to allies and leaders for some consistent and considerable time now. Thank you very much. And then Andy Bell from Channel 5. Andy.

ANDY BELL, CHANNEL 5 NEWS POLITICAL EDITOR: Thank you, Prime Minister. Isn't the conclusion from all that's happened up to now that you've been too soft with the President, and isn't the lesson we have to draw from what's happening now is that you have to start being tougher with him?

STARMER: Well, Andy, I don't agree with that assessment, because taking the approach we've taken has yielded hundreds of billions of pounds of inward investment into the United Kingdom. That's hugely important for our economy and for jobs and businesses and the economy more generally. We have been. We are involved on a daily basis when it comes to security, defense and intelligence sharing. Daily 24/7 in relation to the interaction on intelligence between the U.S. and the UK is the closest relationship of any two countries in the world. And that keeps us safe in ways I can't explain to you, but I can say very clearly it keeps us safe and is vital to every single person who lives in this country.

And, of course, before we got to the better trading arrangements on cars, on pharmaceuticals, etcetera, many people were urging me not to take the approach that we did. But we did take the approach we did and we got better trading terms. And that's why I'm taking the approach I am to this situation, to ensure that we focus on what's in our national interest. Thank you, Andy. And I've got Peter Walker from Guardian.

PETER WALKER IS GUARDIAN SENIOR POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: Thank you.

STARMER: Peter.

WALKER: It's been widely reported this morning that the Norwegian Prime Minister has received a message from President Trump, basically saying the President is peeved because he didn't get the Nobel Peace Prize. Whilst I'm sure everyone watching this will fully understand why there is a need for the UK and U.S. to kind of keep collaboration and link so close, can you understand why some voters look at what President Trump does and says, I think, are we actually serious? Can we actually get anything from him?

And if I may, I know that no policy has been announced yet, but from a personal point of view, do you think it would be a good idea for social media use to be restricted for younger people?

STARMER: Yes. Just on -- I completely understand why what President Trump said about tariffs over the weekend has been so badly received in this country. I completely understand that and I think that's understandable. And it's important that is met with me setting out, as Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, what our principles and values are in response to that and not pretending that we don't have differences, and because strong, respectful alliances require the maturity to say where we disagree and on this we disagree.

And I've been clear about that and I've spoken to the President about it and will continue to do so. But I do emphasize, whatever the understandable reaction of the British public over the weekend, it is on Defense and Security and intelligence and nuclear capability, manifestly in our interests to have a strong relationship with the United Kingdom.

Our nuclear capability is our single most important deterrent, bar none, and that has helped keep us safe for many years.

On the question of social media more broadly, look, I think we need to do more to protect children, and that's why we're looking at a range of options and saying that no options are off the table. We're obviously looking at what's happened in Australia, something I've discussed with the Australian Prime Minister. I don't think it's just a question of social media and children under 16. I think we've got a range of measures. I'm particularly concerned about screen time for under-fives, which is not so much about social media, but about literally screen time and the impact it's having on children when they arrive at school.

[04:55:18]

So I do think we need to look across the range. But in direct answer to your question, do we need to do more to protect children when it comes to social media and screen time and associated harms, then yes, we do. And that's why we're looking at a range of options. Thank you all very much indeed. Thank you.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

FREDRICKA WHITFIELD, CNN ANCHOR: All right, we've just been listening to British Prime Minister there, Keir Starmer. He spoke for a little bit more than 30 minutes or so from Downing Street.

Just a few takeaways from his comments there. He said mature alliances are not about pretending differences don't exist, they're about addressing them respectfully. He later said any discussion about Greenland belongs to the people of Greenland and Denmark. Alliances endure because they're built on respect and partnerships, not pressure. He said Britain is a pragmatic country. We look for agreement. But being pragmatic doesn't mean being passive.

However, when asked repeatedly, I would say the majority of questions from the press were about the potential for retaliatory tariffs after President Trump's threats, he sort of really shied away from that. I want to continue the conversation now and bring into the discussion. Live from the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, Josh Lipsky, who's senior director of the Atlantic Council's Geoeconomic Center.

Josh, great to have you this morning. Before we talk about what Keir Starmer just said, I actually want to play for our audience some reporting from Reuters. This is apparently President Trump telling the Norwegian Prime Minister that he no longer feels, quote, "An obligation to think about purely of peace after he did not receive the Nobel Peace Prize." Josh, your reaction to that?

JOSH LIPSKY, SENIOR DIRECTOR, ATLANTIC COUNCIL GEOECONOMICS CENTER: Well, we are in a crisis right now, a transatlantic crisis, and I think it's important to understand why. The president's social media output over the weekend set off a series of events which you saw the prime minister just react to. There is division within Europe over how to respond. You saw the EU leaders convening yesterday to think about what kind of retaliatory measures, if any, they will threaten.

You just heard from the UK they don't want to put retaliatory measures on the table. The UK and the EU are trying not to escalate, but they're finding increasingly hard to do so. And they don't see the areas right now off ramps from the U.S. side. And there's no deal space right now. It's unclear what the U.S. wants outside of getting Greenland for the U.S. That's a non-starter as we understand completely from the UK and the EU perspective, certainly from the Denmark's perspective.

So this is where we are. A disagreement unlike any we've seen in the first Trump term with him using his favorite economic tool, tariffs, just like he did in the first year of the second term.

WHITFIELD: So Josh, if tariffs or retaliatory tariffs appear to be off the table, at least from Starmer's comments, what options does Europe have now?

LIPSKY: Well, I think Europe is going to have a strong and unified response. We've heard that the EU is preparing a 93 billion euro package obviously will be not met well at the White House if Bourbon and Boeing and others become right into the possibility of what is threatened right there.

But I think what's important to understand from that perspective is that in this situation, Europe has tried the de escalatory path that hasn't worked so far and they thought they had a deal, both the UK and the EU, only to wake up Saturday and be threatened with tariffs.

And so I think you're going to see a much stronger response than you saw any time in the first year of Trump's second term.

WHITFIELD: And Josh, we can appreciate that it's a very bustling scene behind you there in Davos. So we appreciate you trying to, you know, get to us and speak to us about this important issue.

Let me ask on the Supreme Court, we are expecting a decision, really. I mean, we've been waiting it, waiting for it for weeks now about the legality of President Trump's Liberation Day tariffs. Depending on what happens and what comes out of the Supreme Court, how does that impact these new threats of tariffs?

LIPSKY: Well, the president's key economic leverage here could be undercut as soon as Tuesday. He's expected here Wednesday in Davos. So think of the dynamic and the volatility. We could get the Supreme Court decision Tuesday. We don't know for sure. They could overrule his authority to use (inaudible). That's the threat, the authority he used this weekend.

So all that is potentially undercut. Now, that doesn't mean the White House doesn't have backup plan upon backup plan. You heard the Prime Minister just say we don't want to wait on the Supreme Court. There's other tariffs the U.S. could try to implement. But make no mistake, if this Supreme Court rules against the president, it will be increasingly destabilizing to a situation that's already volatile right now.

And I think the president, seeing that and if he sees Europe escalate, could threaten even more than we've already seen the 10 percent. It reminds me of the tit for 10.