[Quest:] Britain's ambassador to the European Union has resigned only months before Brexit negotiations are due to begin. Ian Rogers seen here with the former Prime Minister, David Cameron, who appointed him to the role, was set to play a leading role in the U.K.'s exit from the EU. Now, Britain's negotiating position could be seriously weakened. Nina dos Santos is in London for us tonight. Nina, why is he gone?
[Nina Dos Santos, Cnnmoney European Editor:] Reporter: Yes, we don't quite know yet why he's gone. All we know, Richard, is that he decided to inform staff earlier today. This has been acknowledged by the U.K. government, which thanked him for his work over the last three years in Brussels as the UK's ambassador to the EU. But he does, nevertheless, as you point out, leave a number of months earlier. Just a couple of months before Theresa May was planning on activating that Article 50 get-out clause, by which the U.K. could start to withdraw from its membership of the EU. We do know that Sir Ivan was put in a rather difficult position just a month or so ago, when his private views to the UK government were leaked to a news organization. Views that showed that he said that it would probably take about ten years to negotiate a proper Brexit deal and proper replacement of the kind of deals that the U.K. has with this other EU 27 partners. And that had been viewed as rather pessimistic by some pro-euro skeptic, pro-Brexit members to have the government. I should point out that at the moment, some pro-Brexit papers are currently greeting his departure with delight. "The Daily Telegraph" saying, they acknowledge the fact that he stayed on for a few months after the Brexit vote, but that he should be replaced, they say, by somebody who is positive about Brexit. Whether it's positivity or practicality that wins the day, Richard, well honestly, time will tell.
[Quest:] But how serious is it? If you accept that it's going to be a team of people hosting or holding the negotiations. The U.K. is already short on negotiators for trade and for Brexit. So how serious is it being viewed that they've lost somebody of that stature?
[Dos Santos:] The U.K. is between 300 and 500 people short according to some reports in terms of its negotiating capability, Richard. This is a country that hasn't actually had to negotiate a free trade deal for the best part about 30 years. That's a whole generation of trade lawyers. And this is the most senior negotiator that they have that they have just lost. The big question is, who replaces him from here? If pro-Brexit members of the government, euro sceptic members of the government get their way, it would be somebody who is far more positive about the official stance. By the way, the U.K.'s official stance of managing to negotiate Brexit is two years, not ten. But really, will that help this country to get a slightly softer Brexit than the hard Brexit that the markets are worried about. That's the big question this evening.
[Quest:] And just bring us up to date, it is the start of the new year. We are awaiting the decision from the Supreme Court in Britain on whether or not Parliament has to be consulted. Do we know when we're going to get that decision?
[Dos Santos:] We're probably going to get that decision, we think, before those March negotiations are set to begin. Remember, Theresa May has said that she would like to invoke Article 15 negotiations for the U.K. to exit by March. Probably that decision is likely to come. I believe it's around a month, if not a couple of weeks before then. But before then, I should also point out, we have this other interesting situation, Richard, where it's 60 years since the signing of the Treaty of Rome will be happening amid great fanfare. And if the U.K. hasn't tendered this resignation, if you like, from the EU between now and then, we could have this ironic paradoxical situation that Theresa May is there among all the other founding members of the EU, but she's the only one leaving, but they're celebrating the fact that for 60 years, they've managed to create the EU, even if one of those partners is prepared to leave soon.
[Quest:] I suspect she'll have to be there anyway as a member, but Nina Dos Santos, good to see you. Thank you. The Eurasia Group says it's not economic recession that threatens the world in 2017, it's geopolitical recession. The group has released its list of the top ten risks for the coming year. It sees a g-zero world without a global leader. Risk number one, America under Donald Trump. There are other countries to watch, Germany and the future of Angela Merkel. That comes in number three. Turkey and the President Erdogan's expanding powers, number eighth. And number nine is North Korea. We celebrate and we wish a happy new year to Ian Bremmer, the president of the Eurasia Group. Come on, Ian, obviously, Donald Trump is the biggest geopolitical, you call it risk, I would say a matter of interest in the next 12 months ahead.
[Ian Bremmer, President, Eurasia Group:] No question. The fact that the U.S. president is driving geopolitical risk is something that five years ago, ten years ago, you would have thought is inconceivable. But today it's an obvious point. It's not at home. It's that the United States has renounced the idea of American exceptionalism. Not only are we not going to be the sort of a policeman in the Middle East, which has been decreasing under the two Obama's terms, but also on global trade and critically on global values. You can work with the Russians, Europeans may not be that important.
[Quest:] You talk about a dependent America in this. And you say, "Trump America's first philosophy builds on the core of American values. It's not an obvious near-term benefit or of its provisions of the public good or others writing free, it's not something the U.S. should be doing." That's how you talk about it. But Donald Trump would say, no, you're wrong, Mr. Bremmer.
[Bremmer:] How would he say that?
[Quest:] He would say it, because if America is strong and America is first, then all the allies would benefit accordingly. It's the weakness in America that has caused so many problems.
[Bremmer:] He might say that over the long-term, but it's very clear. Look at the people who wanted Trump to win around the world. Not in U.S., there were lots of reasons to vote for Trump in the U.S. But internationally, you had Putin, you had Victor Orban, Kim Jong-un. These are not people that want the United States to be successful. These are people that wanted the U.S. to be diminished. And it's very
[Quest:] No, that is one that is a very negative way of looking at it. You could arguably say that those who can't want Trump to win were part of the swamp in their own establishment era.
[Bremmer:] You could argue that, absolutely. There's no question that globalization is something that Trump believes is anti-patriotic. And all of these corporations have said looking at their own profits and not of the interests at home. But the Chinese see Trump's win as a big opportunity. And the reason they see that, is because Trump's the one that killed the TPP. Because of Trump, American allies in Asia and their leaders say, we can't count on the U.S., we used to be able to. China sees that as ability to make a lot of for themselves. Not with the U.S., a different model.
[Quest:] So, what we have here in all this. You've got China overreacts, the weaker Merkel, the White House versus Silicon Valley. But if we take China and Russia, neither country has seen Trump's teeth when he perceives their actions are harming the
[U.s. Bremmer:] Well, Russia and China are very different issues on this. The Russians, of course, see that Trump is a win for them. Get rid of American exceptionalism. Deny the possibility of Russian hackers.
[Quest:] o, no my point is, that Putin hasn't seen Trump turn against him.
[Bremmer:] That's true. That's true. Putin has seen the exact opposite, right? Where China has seen that the Americans are saying, we'll put a question on the one China policy. Where now he's tweeting about North Korea and the Chinese aren't doing enough to help. The Chinese are going to give it back to the Americans. There's no question. Trump does believe that America's negotiating position globally is a lot stronger than it has been. And he thinks that if by pushing hard, he can get more. I personally believe that while America remains the only super power in the world, that America's negotiating position internationally is actually a lot weaker, because its allies in Europe are weaker, because its allies in Asia are hedging, and China is more
[Quest:] You are the White House versus Silicon Valley. Why is that a geopolitical recession risk?
[Bremmer:] It's a risk because unlike companies like Ford and Boeing, who can do a deal easily with Trump, give some more jobs in, and those are points that both sides can put on the board, with Silicon Valley, that's hard to do. It's hard to do first because they control the new media, and that's going to be oppositional with what Trump wants to do with it. It's also because Trump's security interests are going to be problematic for their business interests.
[Quest:] I have one question for you.
[Bremmer:] Go for it.
[Quest:] Aren't you just one of those elites that Donald Trump wants to drain from the swamp?
[Bremmer:] Donald Trump believes that you and I are globalists and by virtue of that, we're anti-patriotic. I happen to believe the only way you can be patriotic is recognize that the future of 7 billion people is going to be more important than determined by future of 300 million. And that is something we need to pay a lot more attention to. America first ultimately needs to be much more engaged with the rest of the world than Donald Trump is prepared to be.
[Quest:] I'll see you in Davos.
[Bremmer:] Yes, you certainly will. We won't be at the inauguration.
[Quest:] With more elites. There we are, thank you very much. Now, as we continue our program tonight, Howard Lutnich is with me. You're going to be with me after the break. Come over here, sir. We've got a lot to talk about. Your new president that you've appointed, and what you expect to happen in the year ahead. Good to see you.