tv Atlantic Council Discussion on NATO Alliance CSPAN January 14, 2021 5:12pm-6:44pm EST
>> good morning to those joining us. good afternoon to those joining us. i'm the executive vice president here at the atlanta counsel not to have our center for strategy and security welcome. welcome to nato 2020, 20 bold ideas we imagine the alliance after the 2021 election. i'd like to thank you for joining us for what should be a terrific and innovative discussion. we will hear from top officials including secretary-general and
next-generation leaders. today's conversation comes in the wake of a major study that was commissioned by the secretary-general on the future and also our own efforts at the capitol where we have published nato 20 and 2020 and we have 20 bold ideas to reimagine the alliance. president-electe biden does represent a key turning point for the alliance. the chance to turn away from divisive rhetoric and new strategies for cooperation and our allies and a more capable and unified response to the transatlantic community over the next decade. at thehe heart of that response the resilience of nato is what we are going to discuss today. here at the atlanta counsel our mission is shaping the global future with their allies and
partners. the transatlantic security initiative addresses the most important issues facing the alliance. from china's right to the pandemic to emerging technologies of forward-looking vision not only to build onee is record by transferring alliance that is better that for the purpose of its emerging view of the era. to complement the nato 2030 initiative which we'll hear more about in a moment the council was launched this essay which i encourage you to read it prescribing a bit audacious if not controversial idea that the nato should pursue. it suffered from this congress and former military leaders in next-generation voices through this collective volume is the alliance that is moved more
visionaries and more valuable security to our people. i think the volume is a testament to the idea of testament to the idea that critical nato success is its abilities to sustain public support and to do that nato will have policies and messengers that will reflect the priorities of the alliance. shortly we are excited to highlight the innovative ideas of our next generation authors tand programmers and our distinguished panel. before we do that perhaps there is no one better to look at the future vision of the alliance and the role of old thinking and a close friend ambassador -- he's led a distinguished career in his home country as well as
the transatlantic unity. a romaniae. along with six othes brought into line citysearch for years as romania's investor of united states and is the here at the atlantic council. in his capacity as deputy secretary general he had specific responsible is renovating the alliance in transforming us to the 21st century. we are going to kick off with a virtual fireside chat. unfortunately we are doing this by the fireside but we will listen to your thoughts. before i dive into that i want to remind everybody to follow the conversations on social media at atlanta counsel on twitter and use the #stronger with allies to give us your comments, reactions and thoughts. without let's jump in. i think it was a year ago that
statements from president macron prison erdogan president trump to commission this bold idea of the nato reflection group to to issue report to help bridge the alliance. the report is out and presented to you. what do you think? >> first of all it's so good to be together with my friends and our friends damon and the whole team and congratulations. i read it the forward by the treaty re-imagination and everything in between. i'm not here to make a publisher's pitch orbl an ad for this mark up a piece of work but i'd like to thank everyone involved in this very forward and very useful exercise in forming us in nato and our
brussells at our headquarters. i think this alliance is basically composed by two major things. one is the original idea that are keeping us together. in terms of historical upheaval and acceleration of so many complex things all you need to do is to go back to the origin of our founding fathers. the treaty, how would that treaty looked today if we were in a position to write it again and maybe damon and ben jim were telling us at the beginning. the other thing that is always important for any enduring central allocation in our case and alliance is the dna of
permanent adaptation and strategic participation of foresight because youte cannot n the competitions of the past and the instruments of the past. you have to imagineme the future and be able to adapt and adjust. i think there is probably not even at the end of the cold war with the alliance we witnessed such a moment of dramatic information. for the first time in perhaps thee millennia the west was challenged in terms of not only our economic superiority but also in terms of the idea of how organized human society is. we see weaknesses at inert democratic system and we realize how fragile we are when it comes to disinformation and our democratic society. we also see an acceleration of the competition for
technological superiority and an alliance like nato keeping the edge on technology is the essence of your success and your endurance. i can't imagine a better moment a more complex moment, the more dramatically important moment for us as a family, global family of a democratic nation to think together and preserve our values and our way of life. this is where the role of nato comes in because there's no other organization inza the word and of course there is the u.n. and we are very happy with the indispensable global realization but then it comes to a combination between the same values, 50% of global gdp more than 50% of global defense
spending and nato. there is no organization like nato in this universe of our planet that has so much with both value, economic might and military power and superiority. i think it's the idea to see how can we really moved nato towards a very complicated period and keep our transatlantic on strong and adapt to new realities but also how can we use nato and the other like-minded democratic nations around the world basically together with common ideas. some of the issues in your essays here are a hint not only easy to implement and nonetheless provocative enough that i really applaud it. >> i think you are right. we appreciate that we can --.
>> it's a rare feat for me to read something with such pleasure and intellectual curiosity is this proposition here. this is not just a complement, just a fact. >> will thank you for that. now we comee to the question tht damon has asked, well everybody in the national security establishment in foreign-policy and the national media. how does nato go about and the idea to come with the nato 2030 i think other than the more and the total side of the origin of these efforts there's also something which are all vague ideas and all these ideas are
simple that just in terms of simplicity but easy to express as a community. in order for this alliance for the next decade and beyond to continue to retain our ingredient for success we have to think of basically three major issues and three big questions. how can weis remain strong militarily and continue to have that edgeon because that edge is the best investment in deterrence defense and security because nobody can play around with an organization like nato and nobodypl can play around wih the people that are living in nations under the nato plan, no one. so keeping nato is very strong. it's one important dimension indecision about nato countries. the other one which is a little more complicated and more complex than many other things is how to make nato stronger
politically. how can we convince all nations to come to the relevant question, sometimes difficult, sometimes controversial, sometimes with tension including amongst allies. this is in the first we have had it. every nation is at risk and opportunity the same way with another ally with the different geography or different kind of context. so how can we really transform can help nato -- nato with political issues brought to the attention of this alliance and use this alliance also as a platform of making a more homogeneous and more harmonious and an action oriented political organization because this is one of the most important challenges and this is something all of us
can work together on and the third one which is also some of the propositions in this report is how can nato engaged in a more global role. without necessarily expanding its traditional membership or the things we do. we continue to be a regional organization but how can we also be that element of stability and respect for rules-based order more globally? this leads to technology and their fantastic partners in the asia-pacific and all over the world. nato enjoys paying special attention to our partnership of 40 plus on the way to new zealand and australia in any in between. these are the dimensions that
nato 203030 is presenting. now in his wisdom and we applaud the co-chairs of the group a friend of ours and many many others a wonderful group of intellectuals and leaders and professionals. i think the 138 recommendation is there indication of how the whole group is looking to the challenges in front of nato. of course ministries of nato last week looked at the report in public and it's the intention on the way to the next nato summit that we hope to organize of course with an incoming new american president and administrationpr and all of us sometime at the beginning of
this year whenever we find the right y moment together. it's not to go with all these propositions in front of our leaders. this is not the point that basically the intention is to dispel some of these ideas, the group's ideas and the other ideas of the younger guys, the private sector, think tanks and also have input from our leaders. i don't think we can present more than -- for the leaders to consider on recommendation and then if our leaders will give us the green light, the blessing to start upgrading or changing or replacing whatever additional changes will make to be revisited this is something that probably will happen and it
means between the beginning of 2021 when our leaders meet with president-elect wide net that point in time and we will be able to decide on the strategic southern lines and the strategic content and a to be able to come with the forum which will be putting in place the vision and a strategy for nato for the next decade. >> i'm going to jump in if i might. you answered a couple of my questions already and i thank you for that. it was really comprehensive but in a few minutes we have here i just want to ask a couple oft topline questions in the way she planned for a summit this year. let me start with china. this was an issue and obviously rush is not going away with their strategies. this is an issue with some
debate of different perceptions around the allies so how do you see nato responding to the emerging challenge of china? >> was in china has been brought officially to the attention of the alliance in a structured way in london and their leaders met in december 2019 in london. at that moment we were entrusted by the alliance to look for the rights of china both as a challenge because it's such an important country economically and also creates challenges in the sousley clear we have to look into those challenges but also we have to look at the opportunities and the rise of the gig economy presenting us. we need the right balance between making sure we comprehend and take necessary understanding of the rise of
china from a security standpoint which isa something we need to do. our foreign ministers just last week sanctioned an important piece of of our china strategy that was presented to them during this year of work in london and i think the work on china will continue beyond. that is clear that china is today the country with the second biggest defense budget in the world.d. they are modernizing the aggressively and they are playing the role that sometimes is not very give to the south china sea and that part of the world. this is something that we have to keep an eye on because it's one of the most important transformations in geopolitics geoeconomic sin geotechnology in the world.
cannot pretend that this is not happening. it doesn't mean the russia problem is going away andit' it doesn't mean that moving towards africa and other places is not something we should be concerned about. the issue of resilience is on the agenda of our leaders at the summit. china is one of the most dramatic transformations in recent human history to adjust and adapt and make sure we understand all the indications. >> let me ask a related question to china because he recently joined our conversation on transatlantic operation on intelligence and the alliance itself. how does the alliance think about digital and data in tech is part of the feature and how does that factor into a new
strategy? >> listen this is the most important driver of transformation in our society not geopolitics but geoeconomic and the economy and the way we work with that exist. as new technologies we call them emergingll technologies at natos i would say a dominant part of our combination. as we speak on the civilian side of the alliance and the new technologies we are working on on a roadmap it also lands on the table of our leaders when we are meeting next year. our colleagues are also working on adaptation of what it means for defense security and work capabilities with the arrival of these technologies and some of the issues we have discussed
also with the national commission on ai is something that the councils in courage in us.nt we have learned a lot from that conversation. ai is a major transformation for everything we do but also everything we do in terms of transatlantic security. it's going to change dramatically in many ways military and defense and securities dimensions. biotechnology and the latest in the operation that nato has embraced also in london. this is a dominant feature and speaking of the political area if we are true to the hypothesis that we are an alliance in the global alliance of like-minded democratic free nations we have to make sure not only to
regulate but to legislate to introduce new technologies into our lives. we have to make sure we have embedded the value part and what really makes us the kind of open society that we are. it is a formidable task and i believe sort of a transatlantic digital community if you want. some form that you should play a very important role we welcome the fact that ua is making propositions with the american legislation and how can they put together ouro collective instruments of economics, technological, financial but also ethical and international norms. for us at nato it's very important not only to look into the traditional way in which we
itry to regulate military competition and armaments around the world but this view, generations of technologies that has also been coming dominant is not regulated at all. we have no international system to work into this. i believe that bringing all of us together in shaping the rules of the game and hopefully the global rules of the game is at term and its advantage on our side together with other like-minded organizations. >> let me ask a last question about there was some discussion in the report about looking at climate issues like the health security issues and some believe this is important in some believe it's taking nato off its
game. is this an area where the allies on how to deal with common challenges or does nato have a more direct role in security issues like climate and public health? >> we recognize that nato is an organization dealing with these things. their other national and international forms that are doing this. we are also very much aware that the definition of security is becoming much broader. speaking the risk of illegal migration about these kinds of things climate change is changing -- there is one of the essays on the high north and how this is spurring geological cooperate in forr the high north also china and russia and other places.
for nato if we are not in the first line of response internalizing the consequences of climate change its paramount so yes climate change is a big thing for nato and of course a media climate change being our footprint, our mission our operations are military operations impact on climate and it's important that we do that but from a security standpoin' not including climate change is not a mistake we can afford to make so yes climate change and other related global security challenges are needing attention and we will review those. >> i will have to conclude this part ambassador with one question. a lot of folks here wonder will be increased defense investment amongg allies continue once
president trump is -- yes or no d.c. the defense investment to continue to increase among european allies? >> yes.s. >> perfect. that's a very helpful answer for many of both sides of the atlantic.th mr. geoanã thank you for giving us time to kick up opposition. we are super excited to hear the next generationsns voices. i'm going to hand it over to christopher skaluba the brainchild behind this idea. we recruited them after weise got down at the atlantic council and he said i want to be able to take the conversation of nato to the american people and i want to help focus on the big old ideas of the future of the alliance. chris you got it come over to you. >> thanks damon. i'm very grateful that he could join us and so thankful for his generous comments about her
work.. bold and in which i have banner to edit. i want to briefly explain the project to our audience. the most enduring political and alliance ever has the ability to adapt across geopolitical eras. while it's been necessarily engaged in serious business of that conflict and fighting the centuries wars we want to avoid thinking too far ahead. whether was the audacious idea of the security guarantee in the washington security or the daring decision to invite former adversaries nato's history is one of ole miss. our value was inspired by this history and design to catalyze the next defined mission by offering 20 bold ideas. nato can capture the imagination and win new champion for the
alliance. to that end we recruited a diverse set of 30 adopters with one third of them next-generation. today you'll hear from six of theseti remarkable young authors as they pitch their ideas to panelma of experts about age gender and -- 2020 has been a challenge forr nearly everyone. more than ever we need to be intentional about how we build our nato community between her authors w and editors nearly 25,000 in his body so far and they are companion podcast moderated by the host teri schultz we helped expand the nato family at and the moment we can bring her family together in person. we must consider ideas no matter how strange and difficult at first to create an alliance for resilience.
thanks again for joining us and i hope you're inspired by what you hear today. terry over to you. >> thanks chris and thank you to everyone who is joining us today and general geoanã. i'm joining from brussels across from nato nato headquarters but i'm a journalist covering the alliance for 14 years and most of what is challenge for new ideas to write about so i'm grateful for commissioning young authors to come up with those ideas. citoi'm also grateful to be hosg the series. hope you willat check out the atlantic council web site nato 2020 with episodes for each idea and as chris mentioned we will hear from those young authors today including being joined by a panel of luminaries. joining me here is ambassador karen pierce british ambassador to the guide states and not there've one of our ideas
herself. ambassador secretary for public diplomacy at nato. ambassador douglas lute serving as ambassador nato senior fellow at thehe harvard center and boad of directors at the atlantic council and lauren speranza but i'm grateful to all of you for here today tos help me delve into some of these ideas. this is the privilege i get with the podcast and now we are going to be spreading out a bit. i think everyone will find it very just sing because some of these ideas as chris mentioned are completely new and some we have talked about before but they have all been well thoughtd out and i think nato can only seize a bit of a push from the
outside and thinking ahead. the way we are going to set this up is for the authors and the panel will digest those ideas and then we will hear three more ideas and then we will discuss that and importantly we are leaving time at the end so some of the questions that are coming can be answered by her experts. please submit your questions on the q&a function we will get to them in the end and please talk about what you're hearing, talk about your ideas on twitter. let's go ahead now and hear from our first young author.
>> russia has worked at the perfect formula in joining nato. for example nato membership one of the major flaws has been 20% of georgian territory. all of georgia has been invited to join nato. this would be a tempore measure. this can be done by an article vi of the 1949 treaty in thex exceptional protocol process. georgia has pledged not to use force to regain the occupied territory and it doesn't need -- georgia would not be the only country in europe do not have the territory under article v. why is there not protection for
united states in neither the falkland islands or the united kingdom? now is the time for creative thinking and bold leadership to give georgia into nato. >> many americans see nato as a o is challenge. invested in nato is o invite texaco to join. nato needs to matter to more americans. it makes sense to care about the security of their homeland. for nato expanding the latinx population should take priority. people of mexican origin -- california, texas, and arizona
are the world third largest economy. political power in the u.s. are shifting to places with fewer traditional ties. mexican membership makes sense for brussels in mexico city. from mexico, a formal relationship to nato would institutionalize trade ties. membership won't happen overnight but a formal partnership is attainable in the short term. inviting mexico to join would create new champions for nato in its most bold and unprecedented chapter yet.
>> as the world has seen in the covid-19 global pandemic has been becoming a regional hegemon. it is best that nate is the best positioned to take on the challenge of a rising china. international community are bilateral champions to serve to beijing's growing -- unlike asean the primary multilateral institution in asian nato has an institutional structure capability and capacity to make european countries like-minded and pacific partners under a multilateral mechanism. in the coming decades nato should establish itself as a central node of a global network dedicated to countering chinese activity. by formalizing a partnership.
it will be focused on integrating nato's existing bilateral relationships with australia japan south koreash ad new zealand into a multilateral network. other important efforts should also center around opportunities to expand relations and increasing resilience to its nontraditional security threats predict the countries do not act now unchecked military expansion and that influence action will erode institutions worldwide. it so there we go three new ideas for young authors and i was just struck by the fact that i should thank douglas lute for showing up. it's really hard to find someone. we ask around that anyway thanks for showing up. i'm going to start off with the
first idea. georgia membership to nato fun and i should point out that these are short and pivots here. the areas of georgia which are currently occupied by russia would not be covered by article v.v. that is part of the whole content without those areas covered as was mentioned. i'm going to start with ambassador geoanã. this is a question that comes up every summit will georgia finally get the imitation corrects its great to see you by the way and thank you. what do think about this idea of? would nato finally be ready to extendo the umbrella over the rest that we so currently need at every meeting?
>> we are very pleased to support the council on their own reflections in their own discussions and declarations for the future and is always the contributions and those who help us to think. very interesting obviously and i think the premise i wouldn't say mistaken because georgia and ukraine have been invitedd to join. there is no russian veto or anybody else's beato. it's a geographical process and
they are great partners with nato. political decisions have been made and obviously we need political consensus and how that will take place. >> we should be careful about the wording. there is a plan in place but it doesn't move as quickly as the georgians would like of course. are you saying georgia moving forward with nato membership is only on georgians and what are some of the other locks if not russia? >> russia doesn't have a veto right on the expansion. that is a fact. nato doesn't have a veto on the georgian accession to nato.
it's georgia zone political decision-making in the process and meanwhile we are working on a national basis. last week we were worked so it's making sure that they are able to use decision-making for every member state. spent ambassador douglas lute you've been in discussions around this many times. do you think the u.s. should be doing more to bring georgia both in georgia to help better reform move along more quickly and inside nato to push the allies to be ready to move more quickly
on membership? >> teri when i address a question about nato for adding no -- new members i'm drawn to article x of the treaty which out three criteria for adding new members. one is that the new members, the candidates must abide by the principles in the treaty of democracy individual liberty and world law and the second is they would contribute to the nato mission and the sense of the north atlantic area and the third one, this is the candidate must join with a full consensus of the now 30 members to the alliance today. it's that third criteria that applies to georgia that is the hangup because we don't have consensus among the 30 current numbers.
that's because there is a divide in the alliance between those who recognize that georgia is a good candidate for membership and georgia has made a lot of progress on the political front. in a one of the largest contributors to nato actually. >> that's right one of the largest contributors among nato partners. those twos criteria but we don't have consensus because others in the alliance, some in the alliance look at increasing nato membership and that is the alliance relationship with russia. this is not to say that russia has a veto on membership but there's a significant number of allies today who believed the prioritysi should be did nato's relationship with russia have a balance between deterrence and
dialogue? we are missing that third criteria consensus. we are in a current situation where georgia is not a member. to situationon where the alliane launches into this effort towards membership but it's unable to reach consensus and therefore makes very public the divide within the alliance. i think there's consolidation among the 30 current numbers while we work out nato's relationship withh russia. >> that would move us well into the other questions and that is extending membership to mexico. i have to admit when i had a discussion about this with the authors this was one where i was just like that one seems further to me than georgia. for that i'd like to bring in
ambassador pierce there in washington. this is directed towards bringing in the population of the united states to feel that nato is doing something for them. ambassador pearce would extending nato membership to mexico make americans feel like the circle is closed? you have canada and the uniteded states. mexico would they close the circle or is that an idea but to. >> i think all of the essays were fantastic and very well-written and great presenters. even if the panel doesn't like your suggestion please keep them coming. we are always open to fresh ideas. instinctively when i saw this i'm really struggling to ask
why. i think on the premise of would it make nato more attractive to a domestic american audience primarily that's not a question we should be asking but it would make nato more attractive to a domestic audience. i think the next question withwo beef or nato. nato's role is a very interesting one. it has a theocratic call order as it were. it doesn't have an easter west border which is one reason why i can deal with china. the answer is what the ambassador was referring to before. i suspect you would never get
consensus within nato that they would extend a guarantee to country that has no obvious interest, no obvious stake in euro atlantic security. that's an obvious answer and a bit of a -- one. we do want to consolidate alliances of democracies who are willing to play an active role in security in their u particulr region. it's a really interesting idea. i think it's a thought-provoking and interesting idea and i've would like to see it but the practical consideration means.
>> why canada not texaco? >> exactly. it's a very difficult one. mexico is in the north atlantic. it's very hard when you break it down as you can tell it's very hard to find intellectual reasons as opposed to practical reasons why not. i think it's one of those ideas that i would not like to see off the table. >> i think that's fair. that's the direction i found myself when i was discussing it also. then we move into moving across the pacific even further and that like to bring you in because you've been writing a lot about china lately. is china reluctant to extend --
and if it doesn't go to mexico what about asia-pacific? >> thanks so much terry. it's great to see you and thanks so much tell to all of my that a council colleagues but it's great to be back here with my counsel pam and ends happy to be included on this panel. i think this is particularly timely. the reflection group report made it clear that there has been alluded to. allies are waking up to the severity calls the poor discussion of student strategy and security which very much relates to this idea. the report calls for a revamp of the way nato doesll partnerships with the particulars -- a
particular emphasis on outreach. i think it's something to build on, this idea. managing has to be a two-way issue and i think that's so true.a the only way we can do it, this is a key value of the beit administration. i would say another key theme of their collection group report was this idea of nato. i think there is growing consensus among allies even if nato is an operationalized in every instance nato is still the primary place to talk about kchina related issues and to coordinate policies around them. that's all good. i think the idea that nato needs
to focus on the core challenges at home. that's not nato's job necessary and some would say china's not merely in the region and europe. nato is a regional defense planners should stay that way. we have partnerships at home that perhaps have been waiting longer as we talked about with georgia and ukraine. i think there's a hesitation not because it was mentioned in the essay but some may not align as much with nato's core values and i think some allies are still caught up on either the socioeconomic and if it's incorporating the china and thea issue of china, we need china to work unnecessary issues like climate change and trade and local health owing to be careful about how we engage in places like asean which could upset the
dynamic. i like this idea the atlantic pacific which nato can apply to this conundrum in europe where it does affect nato like on american history and tackling cybersecurity and widespread consultative capability. i think those are all things that nato can dolt in the short-term. i'm really encouraged in the results. >> they met do we go were asian-pacific partners were invited. ambassador you were there. was there a lot of -- as the reflection paper was released? >> absolutely. there was a lot of discussion
and lauren is right they are the closest partners and there's a lot of interest. but it's not only about challenges from china. we should not forget of course that we need china's support in many international joint initiatives be at the weaponization of space that we see developing. we need them on board and global arms control intelligence and ai and military. lithere's this whole set of reasons why we need china to be part. of course form lasting
partnerships with china might. exclusive clubs where would be more difficult. we have to really find the right solution. i would also like to say on mexico of course the partnerships we want countries to have partnerships and the only country in latin america with whom we have a partnership is columbia. building integrity and trading and transformation and so on and so forthwith mexico. it would need a roll from mexico. nato would be the agent office and we'd have regular meetings in brussels with ambassadors and the number of countries in latin america.
so there is a dialogue but sometimes a partnership with the stronger relationship when he both sides. >> you say that nato is very just and i'm sure you'll be getting some calls. my of its ambassadors ambassador pearce and ambassador lived one of the -- increasing leave the uk has been europeans fondness for doing business with china and theirr reluctance to give up some of these deals including most prominently 5g and huawei. is that something that's going to hinder nato's approach to this as well? this has certainly been aa divergence between governments. ambassador pearce.
>> started. it's a very interesting question countries are concerned about china and what we saw with the uyghurs and i think for the first time there's actually more among countries that share country values that made to push back on the door terrorism push back colin what some of china has been doing think the economic question is really a different one of five might say so. the reason the 5g issue is a problem is not the code is a chinese companies in the mix to provide 5g services it's because there isn't enough attention on
supply. the chinese company in the communist party was completed in its material information being given to thatio communist party for the purposes of controlling china's own citizens. so that's the issue. it's not that we don't want a sensible economic productive relationship with china but we wanted to be one that does lead us to an extension and that we want one to be based on the economic trade. as the u.s. and china and that yet and you eu develop our dialogue with china and we develop our dialogue with china it's going to be one of the things we talk about. it's separate from the need to
dealal with china in a way as a strategic competitor. >> just a couple of thoughts. if you take the global world map and you apply the initiative to extend from mainline chana -- chinese lesson you might ask what the purposes we might view is the destination of the initiative both the land route in the sea route is europe so five and a million people a quarter of the worlds gdp are building the initiative. they are building initiative to get totu the european market and the commercial infiltration of chinese interest the buying up of seaports and investing in other transportation like 5g by
the way the telecommunications network and, so forth. this commercial competition in europe comes from the china perspective, the chinesem perspective with an expectation that after the commercial based on the commercial infiltration there will be political payoffs. this was in the military dimension with china but this commercial political infiltration is nato in partnership with the eu that we have to be most concerned about. i'm talking more about technologych transfers the buyig up of commercial infrastructure and so forth. and nato alongside the eu needs to wake up to the strategic play that is playing out right now. the initiative against a reach its destination.
>> we are probably aware by now that nato has not spoken about china until your go when leaders met in london and now they are very much trying to catch up and make up for lost time. t i'm going to do the same thing here so we are going to move onto the next of the videos and hopefully will have time at the end to come back to any and all questions. let's see the next three pitches and then we will talk about them. >> i'm pitching the idea of a nato bank. i've been thinking about the future and nato itself for several years now. there's asu constant sense of teo
administrations. in the wake of the covid-19 pandemic, it will be more important than ever before. the alliance will need to spend on defense, but facing tough choices for the next year. one way to think creatively is to create a nato bank. there is plenty of precedent for nato to follow in creating an internal lending institution. much like these existing institutions, the bank should be set up with guard rails and standards for lending, including practices to make sure projects are in line with nato standards and values. the bank would help defense in the alliance and shift the conversation from arbitrary spending to addressing critical capability gaps. particularly by providing to members who could not invest in new technologies on their own or allowing states to make joint investments. it would serve a few other key purposes, allowing nato to make
strategic investments in infrastructure like bridges and roads and emerging technologies like 5g, provide readily available funds in conflict, and alleviate some of the budgetary pressure after the pandemic. the united states and durable have to think more creatively about the nato alliance, including how to fund it. not that a nato bank will solve all of the alliances problems, but it could be a good place to start. >> >> the stability of our network and how they organize themselves 'l network to reorganize themselves. neural plasticity is a nato attribute. the -- covid-19 is just canary --
that is why my co-author and i propose that nato adopt a test to focus on resilience. the alliance has a resilience framework in place, however we believe prioritizing it is key to protecting members states from novel threats around the corner while reinforcing collective defense. this stronger mandate we believe nato should make resilience functional by engaging the private sector and partner institutions, such as the eu, forward-looking extending it beyond the baseline requirements and establishing a dynamic program, and earmarking resources in developing resilient capability goals similar to current defense. the only constant is change. nato can lean into its neural plastic essence to lead forward.
>> public debates on burden sharing within nato for too long have focused on how much member states spend on defense as a whole without focusing on where the funds are going. member states should reimagine how to spend on defense and adjust the spending relative to emerging threats and collective security challenges. adversaries are increasingly focused on digital and information threats, while some members are awash in cyber capabilities others aren't. as nato grapples with how to operate in cyberspace, it must follow strategy with resources. to ensure funding for cybersecurity is prioritized, nato should adopt a .2% commitment to digital defense spending. this target would increase two to three times the amount that most member states spend on cyber and defensive cyber capabilities.
the .2% should be spent in three areas enabling offense of capabilities on the battlefield, defending digital systems ranging from laptops to combat aircraft, and transforming the idea of the structure of the alliance. a modern force, like an innovative tech company, most harness, store, and sheer vast amounts of data from anywhere on demand. it must work to develop doctrine and capabilities to conduct cyber operations and must invest in defending digital systems. the digital .2% commitment is aggressive and ambitious for sure, but offers an invisible pledge and anchors states to meaningful contributions towards continual modernization. teri: some of these, two of these, two out of three, deals specifically with spending, with money. i will start with ambassador lute, as the american
ambassador. you have had to deliver these tough messages to allies before about the 2% of defense spending. would you want to either be discussing how much allies should contribute to a bank on nato's behalf, or hound them about 0.2% spending on cyber, regardless of how important we know cyber is? probably the united states would be one of impetus, if not the main impetus, for spending more. amb. lute: two of the three topics in this section, the resilience topic and the cyber topic, cyber is a major component of resilience. i think that the current 2% goal of defense spending should be brought in. the definition should be broadened to provide incentive
to invest in resilience and cyber defense- the challenge here is the cybercapabilities can adapt between military defense, military defense spending and nationaltors of the government and its alliance members. we need to be them will more adaptable here in terms of what does count as 2% of what does not. with regard to the idea of defense i think until we secure reliably 2% in may to 2% obligation for spending the notion of creating a new pocket that is a multinational bank i think is a bit of an overshoot. i think we need first to focus on the national spending goal
and six years into the tenure 2% -- could you a were there tei and we need to let that manifest kamala that made the 2% goal and take on greater ambitions. in practical terms it's hard to imagine increasing beyond 2% to for example. a multinational bank especially in the wake of the financial for covid. >> yeah i kind of thought the same thing. to practical when you read it and i would encourage everybody to read all of these essays and they are listed conveniently in our chat here. wouldn't it be nice if every time nato needed some more capabilities it had a fund waiting instead of having to go to allied governments and discuss it but ambassador pearce and ambassador -- come from countries that spend 2%.
do either of you think that governments could be convinced to put some of that money in a bank for contingencies or that theyco would want another pacifc 0.2% for cyber specified as a nato requirement? >> i'm quite interested in the notion of digital funding. whether .2% is right i'm not qualified to say but certainly the additional 20 billion plus dollars at the uk announced beyond defense spending a large portion of that is dedicated to the cyber digital side so it's an interesting idea and i would welcome nato studying it. i think it changes the nature of the nato alliance and it makes
it a different sort of institution if you have money and it then becomes to work and allocate that money. i think having different arrangements and the significance of that many colleagues from the eu not really colleagues but there's a difference between unanimity which is what the european union requires and the consensus which is what nato requires. there's a switch between what is admitted to what is prohibited. if you have the bank or an institution you would end up moving away, from consensus ino
unanimity and you would end up with a different sort of dynamic in the alliance. it's better to keep spending terms but this notion of hypoxic hating the funding is very interesting. >> the issue and the link between the cyber resilience is right. when we look at the hostel attacks on the kinetic attack there is resilience and a proper investmentnt and national responsibility and allied responsibilities. we are to have cyber defense and cyberis included in the defense process. there are investments and it's
not straightforward for military capabilities. it would require corp. from the private sector and individuals. as we have seen with recent developments it does concern the government cyber actors and private sector. the answer there is yes government commitment policies in place cybersector awareness involvement and collaboration and individual resilience of course is there to understand andes be aware to respond if necessary individually and prevent -- on the data front we are discussing all sides and all
ideas and various streams on the edp. and what is the best way to finance quickly and there is the initiative of the type that allows -- technological edge so to finance it. whether it would be a new way of how to do that and achieve the goal that we need i do agree that would require a strong discussion and may not be an easy answer. >> that if i may. it i want to bring lauren in here. >> i think nato needs to work much more closely with the eu. the eu required a national cyber
assessment from each of its member states. nato has not done that. the eu has developed an institutional toolbox. nato has not quite done that yet.ut night -- nato talks about guidelines and not standards. nato needs to be more aggressive with regards to its cyber connection. >> it this was specifically linked to 5g and huawei the toolbox in the assessment of possible vulnerabilities but you are right. many of those countries of course our nato allies and their those who aren't. lauren let me bring you in on resilience in particular. do you think and we were talking about whether some of these things should be regulated by nato but the topic of this essay is whether it should be another core task. when i think about nato's core
task they all inherently includes a deeper resilience. you think this should behe specified? >> i think the point is really important and it really permeates across everything that nato does. i think we have created a -- that means something different to everyone and for that reason everyone nods when you talk about resiliency. we all think it's a good thing and we all want resilient but the challenge is to incorporate that more specifically and to what nato does. it's very much a challenge for implementation. that's based on the fact that there are so many players involved whether international cetacean civil societies the private sector. there is no one-size-fits-all.
it looks different to each actor and it requires that vast scale. there's no obvious way to bring stakeholders together. i think nato could do this and it should be very significant as we have a lot more to do in terms of divining exactly what we need. aree we talking about government being able to provide public services but there's a lot of the resilience happening in the context of societal information or the cybernetworks and critical infrastructure. they think it's probably a combination of all of those things and we need to determine whether our goals and so i think that's important but one thing i'm encouraged about is the nato defense ministries did agree to strengthen nato.
nato leaders meet next year. about codifying what we are trying to do and trying to get ahead and not think of it so much as a reaction but a preventative. and if i could a quick word and i don't want to get ahead of you but since we brought that up already one thing we haven't talked about is that essay on cyber and its capabilities. that is a conversation in the nato context and of course the defensive alliance but i think what wee need to recognize is te alliance's suffering attacks from russia and china especially in cyberspace and the critical infrastructure and cyber espionage and intellectual property theft and all these things have an impact on nato and the infrastructures of our capabilities and military roof
forces rely some extent things are happening and there is a response in some communities there could be more of taking an active defense. moreed importantly i think the report makes the point that even if nato is not the right platform to orchestrate ate counteroffensive nato nations have volunteered i think it's on of them have all appeared in the support of nato activity so using this as a framework and a more aggressive spending that could help us get there and get ahead of the curve and not focus only in cyberdefense and resilience but it's also got developing capabilities independently and in conjunction with nato. >> i think you are right.
you have so much more leeway to talk about being prepared for offensive measures. >> and to do that in the article v structure. nato needs to get more comfortable and it's not what we are used to but we need to stay ahead in the competition. we need to be operating -- >> just to go back there quickly. >> go ahead ambassador. .. military exercises and we do separate cyber exercises. there is a lot around political sensitivity and usage and many other things. allies have improved a great
alice have improved a great deal of cooperation is crucial in this. since power and a number of cases and what they have done actually helped elevate. the national responsibility involving the private sector individual, citizens or society groups or formal networks, will be crucial to really prepare and defend in any of the situations with any other hybrids. [inaudible] see what it certainly come a long way. the discussion, years ago emerge w discussing cyber, no country wanted to share its capabilities, its own defensive capabilities. so obviously the willingness of allies to remember the cyber attack on a one of them is a cyber attack on all.
every one has linked systems that it's come a long walkway it first started being discussed. i know that ambassador pierce has to leave at 4:30 p.m. i wanted to just get a couple of questions from the audience. because i really appreciate them hanging in here. got 20 questions inn the q and a, i feel terrible about not being able to get with all of them. let me start with one from my friend, who asks, this is a key question we did mention including this last round the eu as a partner of nato going forward. this is something that comes up constantly, especially as nato reviews its strategic economy, it's complementary or contradictory? for anyone who would like to takeak that. >> mages weigh in on this. i long thought that between
the nato and the eu is a must natural thing in the world, this common challenges, common geography, 20 common members. and i think the steps taken recently to link more closely the policy that is the north atlantic council from nato at the you, relate makes much morere sense. i would like to see the next generation. especially deal things with low the purely military threshold barely talked about resilience we talked about cyber, we talked about chinese competition. all of those abridge the boundaries between these two large organizations. in the next generation is much more closely together. >> host: nato's perspective? >> the contact we have is a
literally every day. there are of course 74 areas that work in an agreement base. the press do not separate the organizations with allies or companies or whoever are present. we have to be able to respond. and especially the disinformation. also politically think about the concepts we are complementary for each other. also in the work that i mentioned, the eu does with the benefits the allied resilience helps the companies innate certain way to set the
standards. so it nato's does with the standardization, again is the same way it increases our economic power, economic capabilities. there are lots of things and the commitment from both sides from un and nato to work together. stuart others want to weigh in on that? or should i present more question here? a cow take a second question. okay sorry? sega's bassett or pierce still with this? of course with rex's. [inaudible] sure.t >> leaving the uk union is not going to change one iota of our commitment to european and atlantic security.
will always be there with your. only in "the atlantic" area. this new defense spending increase that we have announced, underscores moving forward and nato to work as closely as possible with the european union. that we take our eyes off of the common strategy in the common threat to the year old atlantic area. i think some finds some eu and nato members are about russian intentions to be honest. more time though the less i may have two address threat we
talked about some of the cyber, china, the non- state actors. actually the question in the europeanth union as a distraction from what our core mission should be for both organizations. which is to find a mutually beneficial way to introduce stability and provide the basis for prosperity. i think nato is always going to be the heart of the security's equation. and by definition the european union is always going to be institution moreio interested. more capable of doing something on the prosperity side. those are not mutuallyy exclusive. on the other hand there
mutually reinforcing. >> okay unfortunately friend out of time for to have bear last comments. it was quite comprehensive. i would very much like to thankh my panel ambassador pierce, ambassador for joining us. but especially to ourpe young authors who have such great ideas, very inspiring to me. i feel very privileged to host the series which i hope you all check out on "the atlantic" council website. seeing a new podcast or we have this with the authors. we have much more depth and basically shame me with their millions every episode is a wonderful experience. in the course of "the atlantic" council for launching this program. we've a great initiative. thank you for everyone who joined us online. please continue the conversation online o on twitter # stronger with allies. we will try to go there,
answer questions and continue discussing these new ideas for the next decade and beyond. thank you so much my panel and everyone else. >> you are watching cspan2, your unfiltered view of government. these benches traded by america's cable television company and today are brought to bite these television companies who provide cspan2 to viewers as a public service. >> weeknights his mother featuring book tv programs of a preview of what is available every weekend on cspan2. tonight we look at world war ii. military historian concludes his three volume history at the specific theater. in historian katherine katz looks at the relationship between the three women who attended the conference with her father's. i later historian nassau 1 million refugees that europe and the world following world
war ii prince starts at 8:00 p.m. eastern joint book tv this week and every weekend on cspan2. >> book tv on cspan2 has taught nonfiction books and authors every weekend, saturday 9:00 p.m. eastern heritage foundation senior fellow mike gonzalo on his book the plot to change america which argues identity politics is dividing america. and on sunday at 9:00 p.m. eastern on "after words", adam deputy chief of staff are former democratic senator harry reid of nevada, talks about his book kill switch. the lies of the modern senate and the crippling of american democracy but he is interviewed by wall street journal congressional reporter christina peterson. wash book tv this weekend on cspan2.
>> american history tv on c-span three. explain the people and events that tell the american story every weekend spread coming up this weekend is the nation prepares for the inauguration of joe biden, saturday at 10:00 p.m. eastern we will look at past inaugurations president john kennedy richard nixon, harry truman, dwight eisenhower and franklin roosevelt. done it to p.m. eastern historian mark depew talks about the 1945 battle of perigee and the island strategic importance to both the american and japanese forces during world war ii. at 6:00 p.m. on american artifacts, smithsonian national air and space museum curator jeremy kennedy shares the museums of one-of-a-kind artifacts that tell the story of the first half-century of aviation. at 8:00 p.m. on the presidency a look back to generally 16th covid 1991 as president george h debbie bush announces the bombing of iraq and the start of the persian gulf war
followed by state of union address. exploring the american story watch american history tv this weekend on c-span three. >> the united states supreme court heard three oral arguments this week. listen to all firstname.lastname@example.org/supreme court. the justices are at oral argument in a case on the detention of non- u.s. citizens and body hearings will they await immigration decision for protection from persecution or torture if returned to their home country. they also heard argument in the case of the concerning a georgia college student civil suit against free speech and free exercise of religion rights. amg capitol management llc the ftc on injunctions and monetary relief under the federal trade commission's act. listen to u.s. supreme court oral arguments at
c-span.org/supreme court. senator angus king of maine when healthcare providers from his home state for a virtual discussion on the use of telehealth during the coronavirus pandemic and how it can be used in the future. of the bipartisan policy center, this event is an hour and 15 minutes. >> good day everyone. and welcome to the bipartisan policy center. our focus today on telemedicine in rural america. i am bill oakland senior vice president here and i have the pleasure work with her health team led by marilyn, katherine hayes. for those of you who may be unfamiliar with the bipartisan policy center we were established a little bit over a decade ago by four former majority leaders of the united states senate