tv Conflict Zone Deutsche Welle April 19, 2019 12:30am-1:00am CEST
it was probably no place anywhere in the way things are going to have such a quick succession on. the renaissance. starts april twenty second w. you never stand up for your what of course we stand up for europe you seem to live in a kind of the universe you know like the old let's not be silly please the north atlantic treaty organization nato has just had its seventieth birthday but it wasn't a happy one constant carping by donald trump about defense spending has caused bitter resentment here in europe i guess this week here at nato headquarters is rose gottemoeller the organizations deputy secretary general will she now acknowledge that nato has serious splits in its unity.
rose gottemoeller welcome to conflicts and we thank you great to be here your boss yan stoltenberg reminded the world recently that nato his mission was to provide credible to terence and defense the fact is that the tyrants is no longer credible and hasn't been for a long time has and so why do you say that we've said we're not in the midst of war when i say that because just five months ago america's national defense strategy commission painted a pretty dismal picture the u.s. is ability to protect both itself and its allies the security and well being of the us it said are at greater risk today than at any time in decades america's superiority has a road it to a dangerous degree and its ability to defend its allies its partners and its own vital interests is increasingly in doubt that's fats this move is that there are many different fees. as of how deterrence and defense are conducted today and i
think for nato the emphasis truly has to be on what we now call the hybrid challenges that are coming out us many of them associated with emergence of new technologies and accelerated by new technology let's look at defense commission factor those in its report and then after that the u.s. military could suffer and acceptably high casualties and the loss of major capital assets in its next conflict it might struggle to win a war against russia or china that's got that's not good news is it well what i have to tell you if you ask me the question about whether deterrence is working or not i have to say yes because we do in fact here at nato work together as twenty nine nations with the united states to provide for the deterrence and defense of all twenty nine allies and we do have challenges i don't want to sugarcoat the challenges that we face and particular the challenges emanating from new technology but i'm not ready to cry that we're in the midst of disaster the section pointed
out that for the first time nato has combat ready battle groups in the eastern part of the alliance for battle groups in the baltic states and poland plus additional forces amounting to a brigade the authority of the rand corporation doesn't think much of it says nato forces are not nearly sufficient to defend a contiguous line and delay a large scale conventional advance by a mechanized adversaries such as russia again hardly a vote of confidence in the measures that lead to is taken is that the four battle groups in the baltic states and in poland are not meant to hold the line for long they are precisely that they are going to be credible they are and they are credible as a deterrence and defense tripwire because they bring together forces from across the alliance units from every single nato ally practically are serving in those battle groups and some of that but you and all the russian knows russian know that if they step across the line they will fail. the entire nato alliance but that is
why nowadays we are placing our emphasis on reinforcement and readiness and being able to rapidly move troops in behind those battleground isn't impressed by that either it says that given the current posture and capability including the european battalions and rotational u.s. omid brigade combat team russia still enjoys a substantial time distance advantage in the initial days and weeks of a conventional ground campaign in the baltic states that's the reality of geo geography and the fact that russia does in fact sit as the great land power in eurasia that's a fact of history yeah but i do forces are not providing the tenants that you promised i don't know why you keep saying that tim you're sorry i'm not sorry yes i'm going to work to give sorting some reports that have come out and i'm terribly amused by those around reports you know i work for random the one nine hundred eighty s. they said exactly the same thing during the cold war so the fact of the matter is
everybody gave up there's just no no they don't make it up but they are repeating you know what is based on a reality of the geopolitics and the geography of eurasia what we can do is ensure that russia knows all twenty nine allies are prepared to act and are prepared to reinforce and that has proven during the cold war an effective deterrent and i believe it proves an effective deterrent today the impression of an alliance that is no longer credible has been assisted if you like by years of war games played out on computers by the pen to good range of defense experts major consistently loses against what it considers to be its main adversary doesn't it well i think the best thing you can say about exercises of all kinds is that they are meant to stress test stress test until we understand where our weaknesses lie and what we have to do better i was present this fall when we had our big tried and juncture exercise which was not a. in pewter exercise it was
a big combined arms exercise up in norway and it showed that it had been a long time since the alliance had reinforced across the north atlantic there were problems that emerged in the battle for boer well we saw the end of the soviet union and everyone decided and it was a good thing the last tank of the united states left europe in two thousand and thirteen we saw that as a good thing but then after two thousand and fourteen and the aggression against crimea the seizure of crimea the destabilization of the donbass we had to think again about deterrence and defense there must be urgency mustn't there because last month give you an example a senior research at the center for new america's security david out monica you probably know i know he said other graphically that when the simulations were run against russia and china america get its backside gets its backside handed to it to put it slightly differently i've just adjusted it we usually fail he added to
achieve our objective of preventing aggression by the adversary do you think moscow has noticed that as well well i do think it's important as i said to train an exercise without taking our eye off the ball and when we learn that we have problems then we have to rectify them and that means a lot of hard work but we're in the midst of it it's extraordinary that you do have these problems because the staggering amount by which nato countries outspend russia on defense and still lose the war games it's surprising isn't it really when you think that the alliances combines economic strength in twenty sixteen was about thirty one times that of russians. what are you doing with the money if you're not getting value for money unit i'm asking the question as to whether the problems you describe are actually the problems that you have i'd be very interested to see how the russian general staff trains in exercises i'm sure they also train to stress themselves until they fail and then they have to work on their
problems so i think we have to consider what the challenges on both sides are and in the case of nato and its allies the united states and its allies i see capable forces that are adjusting to the modern warfare and are moving rather i would say flexible am with speed to do so i'm not always sure i see that in the russian armed forces. despite a nato advantage of more than three quarters of a trillion dollars spent by the alliances combined military forces in a single year i'm talking about twenty fifteen you would struggle to win a conflict with russia how is that possible when you outspend them to this enormous degree well again i'm not accepting the basis of your hypothesis i'm not sure that we would actually lose because again we have a great deal of flexibility and adaptability that's why nato has succeeded all these years we have been able to adapt to new challenges when they come out us you
think it's succeeding with two thousand and eight the russians took a bite out of georgia after a lightning strike i know wasn't a nato member bowser nato partner in twenty fourteen in crimea you mentioned they moved to seize that since twenty fourteen russian forces either regular or contract troops have been operating with pretty near impunity in eastern ukraine ten thousand people have died so they just claim that it's being keeping the peace isn't quite true is it i think it is important to point out that article five of the washington treaty applies to allies that's the famous all for one and one for all. part of the washington treaty that is the core of our defense alliance where george's concern in two thousand and eight that was an enormous wake up call and two thousand and fourteen represented a sea change for the alliance not even see it coming not only in terms of a wake up call in ukraine but also the fact that the rise of eisel the
establishment of the caliphate in mosul that brought the fight against terrorism and violent extremism into sharper focus as well so we did have a wake up call in that period and i think it has led to huge change in the alliance not least of which was a huge change in our defense spending and a look at what we really need today to counter both of these kinds of challenges but despite the fact that you provide ukraine with what stoltenberg called strong political and practical support it makes no difference to what russia's moves in the military field in the area has it it's strengthened its naval forces it's built up its tanks according to the chief of staff ukraine general staff last year they built up tanks along the border they're not being deterred by your strong support
political or otherwise for ukraine other i think they've taken notice we have put a quite a bit into training but i want to give credit to the ukrainian armed forces themselves they have been doing a lot to professionalize and develop their capability and capacity over the last six years that has really been impressive and so they working together with us and also with individual nato allies have been making a difference to hold the line but you continue to dangle nato membership is a carrot in front of them without giving them a timetable for it without a timetable it's meaningless as. well let's have a moment to talk about that in two thousand and eight. at the bucharest summit four countries spoke about their aspirations and nato agreed that they would be in the line to have nato membership those countries included ukraine and georgia but we have been very clear that both of those countries are still on the path of
reform we have to ensure that when countries are ready to enter nato store they are ready to contribute to security and defense in the alliance but also to come up to certain standards of democratic principle so what are you waiting for to moscow's take another bite out of eastern ukraine know what we're waiting for is to see them come up to a certain level of readiness for nato membership. in nato allies have reiterated that decision we made some years ago that ukraine will become a member of nato that's the bucharest summit to say that still stands at some point at some time it's up to ukraine to decide who their security relationships will be with that's an important principle from our perspective i have to say though it's also very important that all nato allies be ready to accept them and that means seeing a level of reform and development in their not only armed forces but also in their
democratic practice let's talk about nato seventieth birthday which is just come and go and happy is the one down graded to foreign minister level instead of the usual heads of government. you disagree on many issues and you know secretary general hardly ideal in an alliance that claims that strength rests on unity as is the secretary general had a wonderful speech before a joint session of congress the first time any leader of an international organization has had that honor it was a great day but we haven't finished with our celebrations tim there will be a leaders' meeting at the end of the year in london in december heads of state and government will celebrate nato seventieth anniversary let me put it bluntly the problem is that many member states don't trust donald trump do that his commitment to nato why should there i mean he's done everything he could to undermine trust that he's one hundred percent behind it you know i haven't seen that clearly donald
trump has shaken things up there's no question about it he's gotten off a bit more than that is not morally allies to sit up and take notice because he was very concerned about the lack. of fair burden sharing inside the alliance and he wanted allies to pay more in his inimitable way he got everybody to pay attention to the necessity of putting more money into their defense budgets that's one thing that will come up with come under funding in a minute but i want to just say that ten days ago it fell to william burns former state department advisor to five u.s. presidents and one of the most respected u.s. diplomats over the last thirty years to point out that trumps unilateralism is doing putin's work for him by widening the gap between the us and europe over climate change iran cracks it and nato that's a serious charge from a serious highly placed person of liberalism indeed yairi serious serious but
what's your question why don't you take that seriously you're telling me everything's fine you tell you everything's five but i think elephant in every room listen to he's the one they talk about he keeps casting doubt on. article five of the nato whether it's obsolete or not you've heard the statements and you've read the report courts well look in this headquarters we have important work to do every single day that's why trust is so important exactly trust is broken and that you're in trouble and we are in trouble we are working hard to do what we need to do in terms of running our operations in afghanistan and iraq in terms of continuing to run our operations in k. four in the western balkans in terms of providing for both deterrence and defense and fighting against terrorism in the salon so every day we keep our heads down and keep working yes of course there are differences among nato allies and as i've said mr trump has gotten everybody to sit up and take notice but this is more the true
this is the more just this is more than just differences that lute former u.s. ambassador to nato said earlier this month this is unprecedented we're at the seventieth anniversary but it's the first time allies have doubted the commitment of the american president nato allies he said see trump as the alliance's most urgent and often most difficult problem well again highly placed influential well informed indeed indeed doug lute does as well but i don't need to agree with all my friends and colleagues on the outside what i see as how nato is working day in day out to make a difference to our deterrence and defense and that includes fighting terrorism you seem to live in a parallel universe you know i don't i don't how do you say parallelled look over the house of representatives they have so little confidence in chumps intentions toward nato that last year they had to pass a law with bipartisan support stating that is u.s. policy to remain
a member of nato predicating funs to be used to withdraw from the alliance so little confidence do they have in their president's commitment to nato her a i saw that as a great expression in washington of bipartisan support. art for nato and i saw it when we were there ten days ago for the seventieth anniversary nato is well supported across both sides of the aisle that's a great thing and why why are you not by the president well i don't know about that because you know actions speak louder than words since the president has come into office the united states is spending forty billion dollars more on the european reassurance initiative putting more cut capability and capacity into eastern europe to help in our deterrence and defense tasks against russia so i see the reality and this is at the same time as senior administration officials told the new york times on several occasions last year that the president had said privately he wanted to
withdraw from nato a move let's face it that would destroy the alliance wouldn't it you think reports like that shedding doubt on america's america's commitment to damage the alliance they do that corrosive. well what i would say to you is that it's perfectly natural for all kinds of issues to be discussed and debated in the white house as elsewhere but what we see is the reality and the practicality of u.s. support to nato going to mark or said europe can no longer rely on the united states and must take destiny into its own hands so they're not convinced so that the whole idea is to spread confidence in nato and it's some solidity it's not happening is it well you know uncle or merkel of the other european leaders step up and provide more funding and more capability for the alliance that's all too a good thing this gets of this debate about european defense capability and
european spending on their own defense her way i think that's a great idea it contributes to what nato needs to do it doesn't compete with that let's just talk about the funding issue because. this round of defense spending as gone on and on who donald trump's endlessly repeated complaint that his nato allies haven't spent enough on defense and oh the us a lot of money for the shortfall which of course is false isn't it because they don't do the us any money do they it's clear that up now we were having a bit of truth about this as well from our perspective it's really good that sense we face that watershed year of two thousand and fourteen every single ally turned around and stop the cuts in defense spending they don't owe the u.s. any money to this let's look at exactly when we look at france was going to let's look at what the allies are doing which is spending you know around our there is
truth. what i have to tell you is the way we look at this question is each ally should be spending two percent of g.d.p. on defense and twenty percent of that amount on acquiring new capability and capacity why do you refuse to answer the question also the fed's investment pledge you never correct these false words to you there are forces which donald trump has put on the record which they really that west european european allies over the u.s. a lot of money for the short for the fact is they don't evolved out of the former u.s. ambassador to nato said no one owes the u.s. any money nor is the u.s. spending more because allies are spending less u.s. defense spending is a national decision and is determined by u.s. national security and defense needs true or false well i think it's true for every country across the alliance that they need to spend what it is in their interests to spend and that is on adequate sufficient capability and capacity they need to
get rid of obsolescent equipment they need to modernize they need to pay to train their troops they need to do what is in their interest for their defense and that's the most important thing this is all true of their country. the important thing and you would think that would be valued a little more in an alliance a military alliance which might take twenty nine countries to war sometime particularly when the commander in chief of the largest force says many countries in nato oh us a tremendous amount of money for many years back that simply is not true if we can't even acknowledge that then they took it seriously in trouble isn't it i think we have perhaps a different views of what the truth is the truth to me is when the allies are acquiring real capability and capacity to contribute to our mutual defense well on the subject of these contributions it was left to germany's defense minister there's a lot of underlying to rebuke trump i reminded him point in terms it's not just
about cash decency and dependability are also valuable contributions the clear implication being that germany hasn't seen enough of those contributions elsewhere in. decency and dependability i would out on a state of sin since you're allowing so many false words to stay on the record here oh let's not be silly please but let me say that in fact the defense investment pledges acknowledged to be made up of several different components cash yes indeed but also contributions and capabilities and those come in many many forms and in fact germany is a very good example of where they are putting new new facilities on the table we need to do a lot more on military mobility on our ability to reinforce and they are putting in place a new mobility command in ormonde germany great example of how they are contributing to the alliance we are so it's not the one way street that donald trump likes to claim it is europe contributes enormously to america's own war fighting
capabilities doesn't it providing bases transport systems that allow it to project force in other regions where it wouldn't be able to without those nato facilities but that again is never acknowledged as a you never stand up for your. what of course we stand up for europe because europe is no allow trumps false words to stay on the record well i think we have been clear about is my amends are clear s. intelli doesn't in telling it like it is. in the time we have left i'd like to talk to you about the values of this alliance mystically in nato is relations with the middle eastern gulf countries and in conducting dialogues with them for many years nato is out for providing assistance as to participating countries in the areas of security institution building civil military relations this is a very warm nato embrace for several brutal and autocratic countries isn't it i'm talking about egypt bahrain u.a.e. with very questionable human rights records do you ever discuss the clear evidence
of human rights abuses in those countries are your dialogues human rights free. well by no means because in fact when we work with all of those countries they have . the opportunity if somewhat to pick and choose what we talk about but we always bring our values to the table whether we're talking about is i mean criticizing the building integrity fighting against corruption ensuring that everything they do in terms of women peace and security as on the highest standard we always bring our basic values to the table when we talk to any partner and when we work with any ally and does that mean criticizing their human rights records it means working with them effectively that's not the same thing is it i mean would you discuss with bahrain for instance there continue use of civilian and military courts to convict and imprison peaceful dissenters or from the usa which is accused of maintaining
a sustained assault on freedom of expression association i ask because they're frequently here they frequently visit nato headquarters there wined and dined presumably but you don't ask any of these unpleasant questions while you're a vital to the woman i was asian that purports to have fairly yours. a lot about what takes place for tell me i'm wrong for one thing i'm wrong that wining and dining is rather rare and how we interact with our partners but so why don't tag what in fact does happen is that we portray the core values around which the alliance is built and everything we do with in a day in day out basis is meant to build build the recognition and the acceptance of those values in a kind of organic way so of course the discussion can take account of everything that is happening day in day out in those countries but it does focus on building integrity good to have you on the program i was crossing thank you very much.
it's crunch time for european elections are just around the corner of the building in asia you might ask a simple why should i care what the european market is one of the biggest in the wife everyone everybody needs to get to watch our special show new elections why they matter to asia. spoke of the decision to strengthen the will actions why they matter to asia.
hundreds soft eaves in my hands. where i come from roggio remains an important self transmitting a new and for mission and when i was young my country was drawing confidence the war people most people would cause them. to see. if one's mind joel two two in one of the not just say so as not everyone in that calm cool to listen to those updates says. nothing has been from inside my unknown codea enjoyed not more than the nor even not by us i have missed it with all. my choices in this continent
because you can go away to transmittance patrols. and in the question how much and i will. get up. clay. play. to the new jerome x. you tube channel. now the final story. with exclusive. the must see concerning parts culture to ensure a. place to be for curious minds. do it yourself networkers move so subscribe and don't miss out the flame. what's the connection between bread flour and the european union dinos guild monticello w correspondent at the
baker john stripes just like you i'm sure the rules set by. gene. scott's. stamping recipes for success strategy that make a difference. baking bread on a d.w.i. plane. move. the u.s. justice department has released the long anticipated miller report which examines a legit russian interference in the twenty sixteen u.s. presidential election it concluded there was insufficient evidence that president trump's campaign colluded with moscow but did not clear trump of having illegal.