【By Observer Net, Xiong Chaoran】On January 19th local time, UK Prime Minister Starmer delivered a speech on international affairs and the cost of living issue at No. 9 Downing Street, adjacent to the Prime Minister's residence, and answered questions from reporters. This press conference was most focused on the recently escalated Greenland issue.

According to Reuters on the same day, Starmer called on all parties to conduct a "cool discussion" to avoid a trade war with the United States over the Greenland issue. He also urged US President Trump to respect NATO and other alliances rather than undermine these systems.

After Trump threatened that if he was not allowed to acquire Greenland, he would impose tariffs on eight countries including the UK, Prime Minister Starmer almost ruled out the possibility of taking retaliatory tariff measures, trying to cool down this verbal battle. In response to criticism from the opposition that his stance was too weak, he insisted that his "value-based" approach to Trump's policies was "pragmatic," and that "pragmatism does not mean passivity."

According to The Guardian on the same day, during the subsequent question-and-answer session, a reporter asked whether it was time for the UK to choose between the US and Europe. Starmer replied: "Firstly, I believe we should not make a choice between the US and Europe. This is not a view I have just put forward, but a consistent position held by me and previous governments."

In response to Starmer's latest statement, Shashank Joshi, defense editor of The Economist, revealed that UK Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper had originally wanted to make a stronger statement on the Greenland issue earlier, but was prevented by 10 Downing Street. He said that Starmer made a "quite restrained" statement today and claimed that it was correct for the UK to rely on the US. If the retaliation spiral escalated and the US applied pressure in areas such as security, intelligence, nuclear weapons, and defense, the UK would face an unusually vulnerable situation.

"But I think if there is a spiral of tariff and security escalation in the coming weeks, it will be very difficult for the UK to stay out of it, let alone any unilateral actions the US might take regarding Greenland. Such actions would also come at a heavy diplomatic cost," Joshi said frankly.

Simon Nixon, who previously served as a columnist for The Times and The Wall Street Journal, also commented: "Starmer's speech confirmed my previous guess—that the UK would become the weakest link in Europe's efforts to counter Trump on the Greenland issue."

On January 19, UK Prime Minister Starmer held a press conference. Financial Times

On January 17th local time, demonstrations were held in various parts of Denmark and Greenland to protest against the US's recent statements about coveting Greenland. However, shortly after the protests began, US President Trump posted on social media that he would impose a 10% tariff on eight European countries that opposed his acquisition of Greenland, with the rate increasing to 25% several months later.

Subsequently, the relevant countries voiced their disapproval, calling the US's actions "unacceptable," and EU leaders also stated that the US's tariff hikes could lead to a "dangerous cycle."

The day before (January 18), Starmer told Trump during a phone call that his threat to impose tariffs was wrong. On January 19th local time, Starmer reiterated that he would "use the full power of the government" to stop the US's decision. He said that this decision would only harm families already struggling financially.

"Tariffs should not be imposed on allies in this way." However, Starmer said that he currently does not seek to escalate the tariff war. "A tariff war benefits no one, and we have not reached that point yet. Therefore, my focus is to ensure that we do not reach that point."

Reuters noted that Trump's threat to impose tariffs came after several European countries sent a small number of military personnel to Greenland last week.

Starmer claimed that he told Trump the day before that the deployment of these troops "was clearly to assess and respond to the risks from Russia." He said he hoped Trump now could have "a real clear understanding" of it.

Previously, the EU had discussed response plans, including imposing tariffs on $93 billion worth of US imports. However, Starmer insisted that his approach would differ from that of the EU.

He believed that the UK should work to maintain its relationship with the US, which is crucial for the UK's security, intelligence, and defense. At the same time, the UK should oppose tariff threats and avoid a tariff war through diplomatic means. He said that such threats could lead the UK into a "vicious cycle" in trade and alliance relations.

"I don't want to see this happen," he added, "but this does not mean we will abandon our 'principles and values.' On the contrary, we have a very clear understanding of these 'principles and values.'"

Reuters mentioned that Starmer and Trump had established a "solid relationship." In May last year, he became the first leader to reach an agreement with the US to lower some tariffs.

When asked if he thought Trump was really considering taking military action, Starmer replied: "Actually, I don't think so. I believe this issue can be resolved through calm discussions, and it should be resolved through calm discussions."

After the US imposed tariffs on European countries, this move caused a huge uproar in Europe. On January 17th, Politico Europe reported that the European Parliament had confirmed the suspension of the approval of the trade agreement reached between the EU and the US in July last year.

At the same time, several members of the European Parliament called for using a trade "rocket" to retaliate against the US, i.e., using the EU's "Anti-Coercion Instrument" (ACI). The ACI provides a series of punitive measures that can be taken against trade partners attempting to threaten the EU, including limiting their investments and public procurement, as well as restricting intellectual property protection.

On January 18th, The Wall Street Journal also helped Europe outline options, including trade retaliation, using the so-called "trade nuke" anti-coercion tool, strengthening cooperation with other regions, and even reducing defense cooperation with the US.

The report analyzed that although individual European countries find it difficult to effectively respond to Trump's 10% tariff threat, as a whole, the EU could increase the cost of the US's tariff hikes, seeking concessions from the US on the Greenland issue.

This article is exclusive to Observer Net. Unauthorized reproduction is prohibited.

Original: toutiao.com/article/7597055301820482100/

Disclaimer: The article represents the personal views of the author.