For decades, the Nato alliance has protected the UK and other members through a simple bond – any act of war against one nation counts as an attack on all of them. Thirty-two countries would automatically unite to fight back.

Now, a former leader of the defence organisation is calling for a new pact among liberal democracies to deter economic bullies from launching trade wars – even if that means “retaliating” against Nato’s most powerful member, the US.

Anders Fogh Rasmussen, who served as Nato’s secretary general from 2009 to 2014, is rallying for the UK to club together in a “D7” pact with the EU, Canada, Australia, Japan, South Korea and New Zealand.

It would primarily be aimed at facing down any threats from China, which has potential strangleholds on global supplies of critical minerals, tech hardware, energy components and even life-saving medicines.

However, this body could also prompt Britain and its partners to confront the “autocratic” Donald Trump in unison if he tries to extort allies, the former Danish prime minister told The i Paper in an interview.

“If we come under pressure from China or maybe the US – through tariffs or whatever – then we should help each other,” said Rasmussen, who remains an influential figure in defence and diplomatic circles.

“Economic coercion against one of the D7 members should be considered an attack on all of us, so we should respond collectively.

“This group of solid democracies would represent 30 to 40 per cent of the global economy – that’s a formidable force… We should also engage in free-trade agreements, investment agreements, and help each other on delivering critical minerals.”

Anders Fogh Rasmussen will be advocating his idea of a D7 alliance with influential political figures at his Copenhagen Democracy Summit this week (Photo: Ida Marie Odgaard / Ritzau Scanpix / AFP)

Asked if this risks angering Trump, Rasmussen replied: “That’s actually the purpose: to provoke him. To tell the Americans: if you want to become isolated in the world, so be it, you’re welcome, but we can do without you.”

“I would still love to see the US as the leader of the free world. But Trump has declared a trade war against the whole world, so we have to find an appropriate response… to show they will pay the price with their America First nationalist policy.”

Rasmussen’s strident views may heighten senses in the Foreign Office that ultimately Britain will be forced to decide between closer relations with either the US or the EU.

Still, a more combative approach is highly unlikely to be backed by the UK Government right now, especially it reached a trade agreement with the US last week.

Sir Keir Starmer has sought to charm and placate Trump, to maintain strong and respectful relations. Rasmussen thinks these tactics will only work for so long. “In the long run, you will be a loser if you think that the right strategy would be flattering Trump.”

The D7 concept will be supported by Britain’s former chief trade negotiations adviser, Sir Crawford Falconer, who has been calling for a global alliance of liberal economies. Falconer told The i Paper last month: “You need to work with the EU, Japan, Australia… Beyond China and the US, there are a number of large economies that are prepared to join together.”

The proposed D7 alliance would help the UK, EU and other leading liberal democracies protect themselves from trade wars by Donald Trump or Xi Jinping (Photo: Qilai Shen/Bloomberg/Getty)

Using drones to protect infrastructure from Russia

Rasmussen will be advocating his idea to the EU’s foreign affairs chief Kaja Kallas at the Copenhagen Democracy Summit starting on Tuesday.

The annual conference, which he founded in 2018, will hear speeches from former prime ministers Lord Cameron and Boris Johnson this week, plus the veteran US congresswoman Nancy Pelosi and the Croatian PM Andrej Plenković, among many others.

The former Nato leader is also urging Europe to use new squadrons of drones – both in the air and at sea – to defend sites of national importance from surreptitious Russian attacks using so-called “hybrid warfare”.

“Russia’s military doctrine explicitly mentions Europe’s critical infrastructure as a legitimate target. We have seen the attempt to place bombs on cargo planes, and we have seen the sabotage of subsea cables,” he said.

“We should reinforce the protection and surveillance of critical infrastructure… We should use new and more sophisticated technology to defend ourselves.”

Donald Trump is said to have been on the brink of withdrawing the US from Nato during his first term as President (Photo: Sean Gallup/Getty)

Western security services are confident that Vladimir Putin’s agents have been behind a series of explosions at DHL freight warehouses across Europe last year. Rasmussen believes operations like these are intended “to test the threshold of activating Article Five,” when Nato would activate its collective defences and strike back. “He should be kept in uncertainty about what would trigger a response.”

Rasmussen hopes that Nato members will double their defence spending targets to 4 per cent, perhaps even going up to 5 per cent.

“Defence investment in Russia now exceeds the total defence investment in the rest of Europe. That’s a major concern. If we are to deter Putin, then we will have to invest much more than him.”

Rasmussen has been vocal in calling for European support of Volodymyr Zelensky while his country has been under attack. He wants the continent to “arm Ukraine to the teeth.”

Questioned about the chances of Washington securing a fair and trustworthy deal with Moscow to end the invasion, he says bluntly: “There will be no peace deal with Putin. The US has weakened its own negotiation position by giving concessions to Putin even before talks started.”

Britain’s former Prime Minister Lord Cameron, seen here on the left in 2014, will be speaking at Anders Fogh Rasmussen’s Copenhagen Democracy Summit this week (Photo: Luke MacGregor/Getty)

Autocrats – including Trump – need a firm response

Next month, Nato will host its first leaders’ summit since Trump moved back into the White House. During his previous term, he considered withdrawing US support for the alliance, according to former aides.

Rasmussen thinks a widening transatlantic split is the biggest security threat facing its members, and lays the blame squarely on Trump.

“I think we can force the Americans to return to a more reasonable policy. It’s my experience from 50 years in public life that autocrats need a firm response. The only thing they respect is power and unity and a strong adversary. Any concession will be considered a weakness they can exploit.”

Is Trump himself an autocrat? “Yes. He has clearly autocratic features, and his rhetorics are similar to those of Putin and Xi Jingping.”

A survey of 110,000 people in more than 100 countries by Rasmussen’s think tank, the Alliance of Democracies, has revealed this week that the US is now less popular globally than China.

The Trump administration, including Vice President JD Vance, has refused to rule out seizing Greenland from Denmark by force (Photo: Jim Watson/Getty Images)

And what if Trump carries out his threat to seize control of Greenland, which belongs to Rasmussen’s homeland of Denmark? The US President has consistently suggested that the vast island should become American, and refused to rule out using force to make this happen.

“I don’t think it will happen through a military takeover,” he says. “We are as concerned as the Americans regarding Russian and Chinese activities in the Arctic.” Plus, under a longstanding agreement, “they can just establish more bases in Greenland if it’s their wish.”

Pointing to the example of bitter rivals Greece and Turkey, he adds: “It’s not unprecedented to have tensions between Nato allies.

Nevertheless, he has been alarmed at “leaks from the Trump administration that they will enhance their intelligence activities in and around Greenland.” So has the Danish government, leading to the US ambassador in Copenhagen being summoned for a meeting last week.

“That was an extraordinary step,” says Rasmussen. “Usually you do it between adversaries, but here it was necessary to have this conversation between allies.”

There could be a lot more conversations like that over the next four years.