tv Atlantic Council Discussion on NATO Alliance CSPAN December 14, 2020 1:29pm-3:00pm EST
>> krone wh coronavirus ces increasing across the coury, or use our w site to follow the trends, track thepread with interactive maps and watch updates on demand anytime at c-sp.org/coronavirus. >> tonight on "the communicators," journalist and author james ball discusses his book, "the tangled web we weave" about the history of the internet and today's problems. >> look at this technolog that keeps creating monopolies, that keeps creating the bigst businesses in t world -- all five of the world's biggest publicly-liste companies now are tech companies -- we don't sort of go how come the intern, this thing that we were all told was going to equalizes and connect us, how co it keeps creatin these
really powerful companies and really powerful individuals? >> watch "the communicators" tonight at eight eastern on c-span2. >> host: next, a discussion on the future of -- >> -- i'm damon wilson, executive vice president here at the atlantic council, and on behalf of our scocroft center for strategy and security, welcome to nato 2020, 20 bold ideas to reimagine the alliance after thehe 2020 u.s. election. i want to thank all of you for joining us for what should be a terrific discussion about nato's future. we'll hear from top officials and pitches from next generation leaders of our alliance. today's conversation comes in the wake of a major study that was commissioned by the secretary general on nato's future and also our own effort here at the council where we've published a volume of essays
titled nato 20 in 2020 which ooffer these 20 bold ideas to reimagine the alliance. president-elect biden's victory does represent the key turning point for the alliance. but the chance to turn away -- it's a chance to turn away from divisive rhetoric and a time for cooperation between the united states and its allies and towards a more capable and unified response to the trans-atlantic's greatest threats over the next decade. and at the heart of that response, nato, as we're here to discuss today. here at the atlantic council, our founding mission is to end help support peace and security for the trans-atlantic community by shaping global future with our allies and partners. and our scocroft transatlantic security initiative addresses the most pressing issues facing the alliance. with such a broad array of challenges from china's rise to
pandemic, nato's in need of a forward-looking vision that not only builds on its track record of adaptability, but an alliance that is better fit for this emerging geo political era. throughh the nato 2030 initiative,, the council has launched this volume of essays which i encourage you to read if you haveth not, each prescribina single bold and often very original, at times a bit audacious if not controversial, ideas that nato should pursue. so with offers from the u.s. congress, sitting government officials, foreign military leaders and next general ration voices, this collective volume is an appeal for the alliance that it be more vision flower, more capable, more self-evidently valuable as the security for more of our people. i think the volume is a testament that the idea -- it's a testament to the idea that critical to nato's success is its ability to sustain public
support across alliance. and to do that, with know nato will need policies and messengers that reflect the purities of the alliance's diverse citizenry. we're excited to highlight the innovative ideas of the volume's next generation authors and this program today followed but reaction from our distinguished panel. but before we do that, perhaps there is no one better placed to comment on the future vision of the alliance, the role of -- than the deputy secretary general, our close friend, the ambassador. ambassador was appointed deputy success tower general last year, and he's led a gushed career of service to his home country. as romaine that's -- romania's foreign minister, he helps bring them along into the alliance. he served four years as barred to the united states -- barred
to the united states, and in husband capacity as deputy secretary general, he's had specific responsibilities for innovating the alliance, transforming it for the 21st century. so we're going to kick off with a virtual fireside chat. unfortunately, we aren't doing this in person with the tourside, but we're going to be -- fireside, but we're going to be delighted to hear from you. just want to remind everybody who's joining the audience to follow the conversation on social media at ap scocroft on twitter and to use the hashtag correct me if i am wronger with allies -- stronger or with allies. with that, let's jump right in. ambassador, i think it was exactly a year ago that after some divisive statements from president macron, president erdogan, president trump, secretary general stoltenberg stepped in and commissioned this idea of a nato reflection group to issue a report to help bridge the political gaps within the alliance.
so the report's out, been presented to you and the secretary general. what doyo you think? >> first of all, so good to be together with my friends and our friends at the atlantic council, damon, the whole team. congratulations to all for this. i read it from the forward to the reimagination by you, damon, and jim o'brien and everything in between. it's -- i'm not here to make, you know, a publisher's pit or some a, but this is a remarkable piece of work. i'd like to thank everyone involved in this very forward and very useful exercise that will be informing us here in nato in brussels in our headquarters. i think the dna of this alliance is basically composed by two major things. one is the original idea that
our values are what's keeping us together. and i think in moments of historical upheaval and acceleration of so many complex trends, always it's good to go back to thehe origin of the founding act, if you want, of our founding fathers. the treaty, how would that treaty look today if we would be in the position tood write it again? that's basically what damon and then jim, you know, are provoking us at the beginning. theus other thing that is always important for any enduring and successful organization -- and in our casen alliance -- is dna of permanent adaptation and strategic anticipation. and foresight. because you cannot win and fight the wars and the competitions of the past with the instruments of thewa past. you have to r imagine the
future and baseball be able to adapt -- and bee able to adapt and adjust. and i think there is probably not even since the end of the cold war or probably since the unsense of the alliance we witness -- inception of the alliance we have witnessed such a moment of dramatic transformation. for the first time in half a millennia, the world a is challenged in terms of our not only economic and technological superiority, but also this terms of the idea of how organized human society. sea weaknesses in our democratic systems. we hear how sometimes fragile we are when it comes to disinformation and conspiracy theories that abound also in our democraticic societies. i we also see an acceleration of the competition for tenological superiority, and we know -- a alliance like nato keeping the edge on technology is the essence of your success and of your --
[inaudible] so i cannot imagine a better moment, a more complex moment, a more dramatically important moment for us as the family, global family of democratic nations to think together, preserve our values and way of life and also imagine the future. it's where i think the role of nato comes t in, because there s no other organization in the world -- of course there is the u.n., and we are very happy with the -- [inaudible] indispensable global organization, global rules. but when it comes to a combination between same values, 50% of global gdp, more than 50% of global defense spending, that's nato. there is no other organization like nato in this universe of our planet that has so much ingredienteds of both values, economic might and military
power and superiority. so i think the idea to see how we really move nato towards this very complicated period and keep our bond strong and adaptive to the new realities but also how can we use nato and also the other like-minded democratic nations around the world basically together a common idea. and i think some of the issues in your essay here are a hint not always easily to be implemented, but nonetheless provocative enough. and i really applaud this effort. >> thank you, ambassador. i think you're right, the whole cdou where is -- the whole idea- >> [inaudible] i still read a lot. but it's a rare feat for me to read something with such pleasure and such intellectual curiosity like this proposition here. so this is not just p a compliment, it's just a fact.
>>t, no, thank you for that. >> coming back to the question that kay monohas asked -- damon has asked, and it's on everybody's, you know, in the national security or establishment and foreign policy pundits and the national media, how is nato going about this? and the idea to really come with a gnaw toe 2030 -- nato 2030 vision by secretary general stoltenberg, i think it makes sense. you need to remember other than the more, if you want, anecdotal side of the origin of this effort, there was also something which is far -- all bug with ideas and all big visions are simple, are simple in terms of not sum plusty, but in terms of easy to express and communicate. and basically jens stoltenberg basically said three things. in order for this alliance for the next decade and beyond that to continue to retain our ingredients for success we have
to new of base -- to think of basically three major issues and three big b questions. how can we remain strong militarily and continue to be, to havema that edge. because that edge is the best investment in deterrence, defense, peace and security. because nobody can play around with an organization like nato, and nobody can play around with the security of one billion people that are living in nations under the nato flag. no one. keeping nato strong the is one important dimension of his vision. the other one which is a little thbit more complicated, and like always, politics is more complex than, you know, many other things, it's how to make nato stronger politically. how can we convince all nations to come to the relevant question, sometimes difficult, sometimes controversial, sometimes leading d to tension including between and amongst
allies -- that's not the first time we have this. we are democratic nations. not everywe nation sees, you kn, risk and opportunity the same wayit wh another ally from a differental geography or a different kind of context. domestic, political context or regional context. so how it really transform and have nato as the place where security-related political issues areol brought to the attention of this alliance and use this alliance as also a platform of making a more homogeneous, more harmonious, mores action-oriented political organization? because this is one of the most important challenges, and this is something that we have all of us to work together. and the third one, which is also part of some of the propositions in this great report, is how can nato engage in a more global
role without necessarily expending us traditional membership or the things weo. we continue tock a regional -- to be a regional organization, a transatlantic organization, but how can we also be that element of stability and respect rule-based law and order more globally. and this leads me also to technology, leads me to our fantastic partners in asia-pacific and all over the world. nato enjoys today and success tower general stoltenberg asked me to pay specific attentiono our partnership, there are 40 plus partners we have all ove the world from colombia all the way to new zealand and australia and many others in between. these are the three dimensions that nato 2030 is presenting. now, sec-gen, in his wisdom -- and alsoan we applaud the inpute had from [inaudible] marta, ariend of ours, many,
many others, a wonderful group of intellectuals, of leaders, of professionals. and i think the 138 recommendations are indication of how the whole group is looking to challenges in front of nato and opportunity in front of nato. of course nato just last week had the first look, now the report i public, and it's the intention of the secretary general on the way to the next nato summit that we hope to organize, of course, incoming new american president and the new administration i if, a all f us sometime at the beginning o next year whenever we find the right moment together not to go with all these propositions in front of our leaders. this is not the point. but basically the intention is to distill some of his ideas, of
the group's ideas, of the other ecosystems' ideas, youth younger guys, private sector, civil society, think tanks and also have his own input to our leaders. so i don't want anticipate secretary general stoltenberg to present more than five or six big things for the leaders to consider uponto his recommendation. and then if our leaders will be giving us l the blessing to stat ineven upgrading or changing or replacing, whatever, discussion they will make and we will make for the strategic concepts to be revisited, thi is again something that probably will happen, and it means that between beginning of 2021 when our leaders will be meeting with president -- not elect, but president biden at that point in time, and husband team will be ab to decide on the strategic
alliance andthe probably by 2032 on the to be able to come with the four which would be, you know, putting in place the vision and the strategy for nato for the next dede. >> ambassador, i'm going to jump in right here, if i might. you've answered a couple of my questions alreadyn that open, so thank you for that. that wasle really comprehensive, but in the few minutes we have here, i just want to try to ask aa couple top-line questions of how you're thinking of it in the wake of the reflection group and as you plan towards the summit e next year. and let me start with china. this was an issue -- obviously, russia's not going away in nato's strategy. this was an issue of some debate insi the reflexion group, different perceptions around the allies, so how do you see nato as responding to the increasing challenge of china? >> listen, china has been brought officially to the attention of the alliance in a structured way in london when
our leaders met in december 2019 inn london, last time when they met. and at that moment we were instructedt as an alliance to start looking at the rise of d china both as a challenge because the rise of such a, an important country economic clue, technologically literally also creates challenges, and that's absolutely clear that of we have to look into those challenges. but also to look to the opportunities that the ruse of a bug country with a big economy is also presenting to us. so finding, basically, the right balance between making sure that we comprehend and we take necessary, you know, understanding of the implications of the rise of china from a security standpoint which is something that we with continue to do. our 40 members just last week sanctioned an important piece of chew that strategy that was presented to them -- china
strategy that was presented to them during this last year in london, and i'm convince ared work on china will continue to the summit and beyond. it's absolutely clear that china is today the country with the secondefense budget in the world, that they are modernizing aggressively, their military capabilities that are playing a role that is sometimes p is not very constructoff in the south china sea -- constructive in the south china sea and that part of the world. this is something we have to keep an eye on, because that's one of the most important transformation in geopolitics, geo economics in the world, and we just cannot pretend this is not happening. it doesn't mean that the russia problem is going away, doesn't mean the terrorists that continues to be m so per vaseoff and moving towards africa and orr places is not something we should not be concerned about, it doesn't mean that it's an
issue of resil yens. it will be on the agenda of the summit, it's already been decided -- [inaudible] but china is one of the most dramatic transformations we've seen in recent human history, and it's only normal for us to adjust and adapt and make shower that we understand all the implications of the rise of china. >> let me ask a related question to china, because you recently joined our stage for a conversation on trying to find a.i., artificial intelligence, you're leading the innovation drive itself. how does the a alliance think about digital and data and tech as part of its future? how does that factor in to a new nato strategy? >> listen, this is a, the most important driver of transformation in our societies. not geopolitics, but also geo economics and economy and the way we work, live and exist.
and new technologies, we call them emerging and erupting n chnologies at nato. it's already a very i would say dominant part of our conversation. as we speak both on the civilian side of the alliance, on innovation, new technologies were working on a road map, an implementation road map that also has landed somehow on the table of our leaders when they meet next year. our military colleagues are also working on, of course, an adaptation of what it means for our defense security and war fighting capabilities, the arrival of new technology. and,ap obvious, some of the isss we discussed also with the national commission on a.i., also the atlantic council is encourage us to interact, and we learned a lot in that conversation. a. i. and big data, that's a
major transformation for everything we do but also for everything we do in terms of do fence and security. defense and security. quantum computing is here and going to change dramatically many, many ways both in civilian life, but also military and defense dimension. biotechnology, space which is the latest of the optional domains that nato has embraced also in london. so this is a dominant feature. and what i believe, speaking of the political west, is that if we are true to the hypothesis that we are an alliance, a globale alliance of like-minded democratic nations, free nations, we have to make sure that when we start not only to regulate, but to legislate, to introduce w technologies into our lives. we have too make sure that they ddve embedded also the value
part, what really makes us the kind of open society that we are. and this is a formidable task, and this is something that i believe sort of a transatlaic digital community, if you want. some form of -- also e.u. is making some proposition to the incoming american administration to try to see how can they put together our collective, collective instruments of economics, psychological, financial but also values, ethical and international norms into this. for us in nato, it is very important not only to look into the traditional arms control and the tradition a always in which we try to regulate military competition and armaments around the world, but this new generation of technology that is also in security terms becoming
dominant is not rigorous at all. were no international assistance working through this. so this, i believe, bringing all of us togethern shaping the rules of the game, hopefully the global rules of the game while we have this tremendous advantage on our side is one of the most important jobs were at hand. nato together with other like-minded organizations can play a very important role. >> let me just can a last question, there's some discussion in the report about looking at climate, issues like the a pandemic, public health and security issues. and some believe this is right and it's important, and some believe this is taking nato off its game. how do you sort of see -- is this an area wre the allies can consult togetr on how to deal with common challenges, or does nato have a mor direct role in issues like climate and
public health? >> one recognizes that nato is not -- front line if you want organization in dealing with these things. there are many other national and international fora that are doing this. we are also very much aware that the very definition of security is becoming much broader. and speaking of africa and terrorism and the risk of illegall migration and all these kinds of things, climate change is impacting on our security. climate change is changing also in your report there is one of the essays on the high north and how this is also purring geopolitical -- spurring geo political competition for the high north between also china and russia and other places. so for nato, even if we are not, you know, in the first line of response kind of thing in, internalizing the consequences of climate change for us from a security standpoint is paramount. so, yes, climate change is a big thing for us in nato.
of course, immediate climate change, our footprint, our missions, our operations, our military operations impact on the climate, that's important we do that. but i think from a security standpoint not incding climate change would be, you know, a huge mistake that we cnot afford to make. so, yes, climate change and other related global security challenges are needing attention, and we'll deal with those very, very actively. >> i'm going to have to conclude this part, ambassador, with a one-question sort of yes or no answer. a lot of folks here wonder will the increased defense investment amongal lieus continue once -- allies continue once president trump leaves office? yes or no, do you see defense investment going to continue to increase among european allies? >>li yes. >> performance. [laughter] that's a very helpful -- perfect. that's a very helpful answer for
many on both sides of the atlantic. mrambassador, thank you so much for giving your time. with that, i'm going to hand the baton over n to chris,he director of our transatlantic security initiative. he is the brain child behind this idea. when we recruited hum after h he stepped down from the pentagon tod come to the trick council -- atlantic council, he said i want to be able to take the conversation to the american people and help-focus on some bug, bold ideas on the future of the alliance. chris, you've done it. over to you. >> thanks, damon. i am very grateful that the ambassador could join us and shower his insights about the 2030 agenda. so thankful for his generous comments about our work. bold and forward-looking were the themes that inspired our nato 20 2020 volume which i had the honor to edit. i want to briefly explain the project to our audience with. nato's success, the most
enduring political alliance ever, stems from its ability to adapt. while it has been necessarily engaged in the serious business of fighting the centuries' wars, rightly avoided thinking too far ahead. but nato's history shows when it pauses to consider the future, the resulting vision is momentous whether it was the audacious idea of a mutual securityr guarantee enshrined in the washington treaty or the daring decision to invite former adversaries to its ranks, nato's history is one of boldnesses. our volume was inspired by that history and designed to catalyze the next defining vision by offering 20 bold ideas to reimagine how it operates. nato can again capture the public's imagination and win new champions for the alliance. to that end, we recruited a diverse is the of 38 authors with nearly a thursday of this many next generation voices. today you'll hear from six of these remarkable young authors as they pitch their ideas to a panel of experienced experts
bridging age, gender and ethnic divides. 2020 has been a challenge for everyone. more than ever, we need to be intentional about how we build our gnaw toe community. between our authors and editors, the nearly 25,000 readers of this volume so far, the listeners to our companion podcast moderated by terry schultz and all i don't have you joining today, we hope -- all of you joining today, we hope this serves us in good stand thing. if nato is to make good on the promise, it must consider ideas that mayas sound strange or difficult at first but that might create an alliance more resilient, united and equipped for what lies ahead. thanks again for joining us. i hope you're inspired by what you hear today. verry, over to you. >> thanks, chris, and thank you to ambassador and to everyone who is joining us today. i'm joining you from brussels
across town from nato headquarters. i'm a journal u.s. who's been ncovering the alliance -- jourl who's been covering the alliance for 14 years, and most of what i do is hound them for new ideas to you about, so i'm very grateful to the atlantic council to come up with some of those ideas from the outside. and i'm also grateful to be able to be hosting this series which i hope you will check out nato 20 20, we're going to have an episode for each idea. and asch chris mentioned, we're going to be hearing from six of those young authors today to be joined byyo a panel of luminari. joining me here is ambassador dame karen pierce, british ambassador to the united states and author of one of our, one of our ias herself, modernize the kit and the message. the assistant secretary general for public diplomacy at nato, ambassador doug luke who used to be here in brussels serving as
the u.s.word to nato, he is now a senior fellow at the harvard senior center and board director at the atlantic council and the director of transatlantic defense and security at the center of free european policy analysis. and very grateful to all of you for joining us here today to help me delve into some of these ideas with. this is the privilege i get with each episode of the podcast, and now we're going to be spreading out the responsibility a bit, and i think everyone will find it very interesting because some of these ideas, as chris mentioned, are completely new, some of them we've talked about before, but they have all been well thought out, and i think nato can always use a bit of a push from the outside on thinking ahead. ..
importantly, we are leaving time at the end so some of the questions i see are already coming and can be answered by our experts. please submit your questions on that q&a function and we will get to them at the end. please talk about what you are hearing from a talk about your ideas on twitter at # stronger with allies. let's go ahead now and hear from our first three young authors. >> russia has worked out the perfect formula to stop these countries from joining nato. for example, georgia was promised nato membership at the 2008 bucharest summit for the
still not a member. one of the major succession has been a russian occupation of 20% of georgian territory. all of georgia should be invit to join no. this would be a temporary measure until the occupation ends peacefully. this can be done by many article six of the 1949 north atlantic treaty durg the session protocol. there is president to do this. georgia has made a pledgega regarding the occupied region paid georgia has pledged not to use force to again occupy territory and it doesn't need the nato security from them either. s georgia would not be the only country in nato do not have all this protected under article five. for example, why is not productive thenited states and neither a the falkland islands of the united kingdom. after 12 years now was a time for creative thinking and bold leadership to get georgia into nato.
>> today u.s. support from america is eroding in one of the challenges surrounding public support for nato as a result of changing the u.s. demographic. surprisingly, the united states is invested in nato and invite mexico to join. nato needs to matter to more americans and just as it has in the past andnd make sense the citizens will care about the security of their familiar homeland. for nato the interest of the senate should take priority in the u.s. is recognized will account for 29% of the entire u.s. population by 2060 and mexican origin people comprise 62% and taken together california, texas and arizona are the world's third largest economies. clearly, economic and political power in the u.s. is shifting the places of fewer traditional and this makes diversifying nato's more important than ever before. axa can membership does make sense.
mexico stands to offer a five dollars in defense spending, the thirdacific member to help contain china and the chance to expand nato's presence in latin america but the alliance is rationally [inaudible] a former relationship with nato would institutionalize defense andio trade ties and -underscore it is mba regional power. membership won't happen overnight but theer former partnership is attainable in the short term. this proposal may be plausible with the possibility of more nations joining the alliance. it will invigorate new champions for nato while making it a bold and unprecedented chapter. >> as the world has seen in recent months the covid-19 global pandemic has done little to stormy chinese in addition to becoming a regional hegemon. both asia and europe will increasingly face a
full-spectrum challenge from china in traditional and nontraditional security. nato is in the best position to ttake on the challenge of a chsing china and the international communi means multi- lateral champions to serve as a counterweight to beijing's growing military. unlike [inaudible] a prima multilateral institutionf southeast asia nato has the institutional structure, capabilities and capacity to link european countries of like-minded into pacific partners under a cohesive multilateral mechanism. in the coming decades nato shall establish itself as a central note of a global network dedicated to countering chinese hostile and malign activity. it should formalize an atlantic partnership. the act will focus on integrating nato's existing bilateral relationship with australia, japan, south korea and new zealand. this is into a multilateral relative network and other
important efforts under the app should also center around seeking opportunities to expand current relations and increase resiliencees to nontraditional security. if countries do not act now unchecked military expansion and malignedgn chinese influence operations will quietly erode democratic constables and institutions worldwide. >> there we go, threeew ideas, three young authors and i was just struck by the fact that i should thank doug for showing up. you are the token male on this round. sometimes it's hard to find someone. we ask aund but anyway, thanks for showing up, and faster. i love the gender balance on these ideas. i will startff with the first idea. grant georgia membership to nato finally. i shld point out that on this idea they're very shortened pictures here but the areas of
georgia which are currently y cupied by russia would not be covered by article fe. that is part of the whole concept here to accept georgia without those areas covered, as she mentioned le hawaii. i will start with ambsador. they are at nato and this is a question that comes up every ministerial, every summer, will georgia finly get the invitation? great to see you, by the way. what do you think about this idea?na is nato, should nato finally be ready to extend the umbrella over the rest of georgia as georgia so fervently leading? >> i'm still taking -- we are very pleased to support the press of the transatlantic counsel has been engaging with of their own reflections and discussions in their own sort of
declarations for the future and, as always, we are there to help with civil society and everyone else who will help us to think. so, on the country pitch, very interesting obviously. i think the premise is slightly, i would not say misken but not because georgia and ukraine have been invitedte to join. if we remember in the bucharest summit which says tha ukraine and georgia will become members. there is no russian veto and know anybody else's veto. process in a's a very political processut also a practical process in both georgia and ukraine are grateful to be nato because they contribute and work on everything. we are there to supporthem and less political decisions have been made.
obviously, we have to go through the steps and how that will take place. >> that is true. we should be careful about the wording. there is a plan in place but it iaesn't move as quickly as the georgians would like, of course. are you saying that the weight about georgia moving forward towards fullbo nato membership s only on georgians? what are some of the other blocks if not russia? >> russia doesn't have a veto right on nato's expansion. we have seen throughout history that is a fact. nato doesn't have a veto right either on ukraine so georgia a session into nato is very much arnd nato's own political decision-making process and meanwhile we are working on a very practical basis just last week, we had nato ministerial
with presidents virtually and oneay they will meet inerson again but it's really very practical and we are just making sure that the standards that they are able to use their full potential with mility and political decision-making and everything, you know, as for every member state. >> ambassador, he then in those meetings and you been in the discussion around the table many a time so do you think t u.s. should be doing more to bring georgia, both in georgia to help their reforms move along moreng quickly and inside nato to push the allies to be ready to move more quickly on geoian membership? >> so, terry, whenever i get asked a question about nato or adding new members i'm drawn to
thtreaty. right? article ten ofhe washington treaty lays out three criteria for adding new members. one is that the new member the candidate must abide by the principles of the treaty and this is democracy and individual liberty and rule of law and the second is that the candidate must be able to contribute to nato's mission, defense of the north atltic area and then the third one is the tough one. the candidate must join with the full consensus of the now 30 members of the alliance today. it is that third criteria when applied to georgia that is a hang up because we don't have consensus among the 30 current members. that is because there is a divide in the alliance. it i between those who recognize that georgia is a good candidate for membership in georgia has contributed and so forth.
georgia has made a lot of progress on the blue front but on the other hand. >> but the largest contributor of nato operation abroad actually. >> that's right. one of the largest contributors among nato's partners. those two criteria seem to be met but we don't have consensus because others in the alliance, some of the alliance with that increasing nato membership intercepts another big issue with the alliance and that is the alliance relationship with russia. this is not to say that russia has a veto on membership but there is a certificate number of allies today who believeve that the priorities should be getting nato's relationship with russia right with the balance between deterrence and dialogue. this is before adding new members. we are missing that third criteria, consensus. i would just note that worse than the current situation where georgia is not a member, it's a
situation where the alliance launches into this effort towards membership but is unable to reach consensus and therefore, makes very public this divide within the alliance. i think we are in a time of consolidation among the 30 current members while we work out nato's relationship with russia. >> okay, that would move us well into the other two questions so as by the pitches in that, extending membership to mexico. i have to met when i had the discussionio about this with the authors this was one where i was just like that one seems a bit further to me than georgia so with that i like to bring an ambassador peers. you are there in washington and this pitch was directed toward bringing in the population of the united statesf to feel that nato is doing something for them to not feel that it's so remote
and ambassador peers, with extending nato membership to mexico make americans feel like the circle had been close. of canada and the united states and mexico just needs to be there to close the circle or is that an idea too far for you also. >> thank you for asking me. this is a great idea and i think all the essays were fantastic and very well written and thank you to the presenters. even if the panel doesn't like your doesn't support your suggestion keep them coming and you'll wish we always like to challenge and take the great ideas. instinctively when i saw this i thought no, that won't work but i'm really struggling to articulate why and i think on the premise of what it make nato more attractive to a domestic american audience merrily that's not a question for a foreign
should be answering but i think the answer probably is yes, it would make nato more attractive to a domestic american aience but i think the next question is with them being nato nato role is a very interesting one and has a geographical southern border as it we and has the tropic of cancer but it doesn't have an east or west border which is one rean why it can deal with china. i suspect that the answe is one that the ambassador was referring to before and i suspect you would never get consensus within nato that they would extend the article five guarantee to a country that hase no obvious interest, no obvious steak is the best way of putting it in euro atlantic security and
that's an obvious answer but borings and the weasley o. i think if we do want nato to survive and thrive and we do want to consolidate alliances of democracy and countries who are willing to play an active role in holding stability and security in their region i think it's an interesting idea and i mean to be clear it's not uk government policy but i think it's thought-provoking and interesting idea and i wouldn't like to see it dismissed out of hands but i think the practical consideration meaning it is not one for now. >> but whyri canada and not mexico? is in that -- >> exactly, this is when you intellectualize it and it's a difficult one to say mexico is in the north atlantic and ver hard to, when you break it down
i find it and you can tl i'm struggling, i find it very hard to find intellectually reasons as opposed to practical reasons why not. i think it is one of those ideas where the time has not yet come they would not like to see it off the table. >> i think that's fair and the direction i found myself when i was guessin it with gabrielle and chris also. then we move across to moving the pacific even further and lauren, i'd like to bring you in because you been writing ae lot about china lately. is nato going to extend to georgia, which is fighting alongside it very fiercely in afghanistan for example and if it doesn't want to go to mexico which is moving its other allies what about asia-pacific? >> thanks so much. great to see you and thanks so
much to all of my colleagues. it's great to bend back here wih my atlantic council family and i'm happy to be included on this distinguished panel. i think that china pitch is particularly known one it was perhaps biggest headline coming out of the nato 2030 reflection group report and ihe think that made it clear that have been deputy secretary alluded to significant teaching and allied leaders waking up to the severity of the china challenge and called for body to discuss strategic and security related to issues posed by chinese influence in europe and relates to this idea in the report lled for a revamp of the weight nato does parerships with the particular emphasis on outreach into the end of pacific. i think that provides something to build on there and relates to this idea. the pitch makes the point that managing has to be a truly transatlantic issue and i think
that is so true and thenly way that we could out match china is the unitedis states and our alls and partners that nato does together. i think it will be a key strategy of the biden administration whose top foreign policy priority will include china and be seen to leverage our allies with a pretty fake advantage in that competition. i would also say that the ethics takes on a keen theme of the report which is nato at the essential forum. i think there is growing consensus among allied leaders that even if it'sow operationalized in every instance is still the primary basis to talk about china related and security issues and coordinate policies around them. that is all good and i think the pushback probably comes at the idea that nato needs to focus on the core that challenges at home before we branch out to asia and that's not nato's job necessarily intern is not primarily a military in the region in europe and nato is a
regional defense line to stay that way and plus we already have partnerships at home and we ow that perhaps we been waiting longer as we talked about with georgia and ukraine and i think there could be hesitation with, not the countries mentioned in the essays because the strong democracies but the indo pacific that might not align as much with nato's core values and then finally getting some allies are still too caught up on either the short-term economic benefits cooperating with china or more cautious that the issue of china is so big we need china in certain respects to work on necessary issues like climate change and trade and global health so we need to be careful about how we engage in institutions which could affect dynamics of china in some ways. i really liked the report that had this idea of the atlantic pacific worship and highlights the capabilities nato can apply to the china and europe in particular where it does affect nato and it talks about maritime
history and navigation operations and tackling hybrid threats, cybersecurity and medications in this widespread tymplicated state siting those are all things that nato can do in the short-term and on china and so i'm encouraged by this. >> nato just had a foreign minister meetingat a week ago in which asia-pacific partnership were invited and strengthen partnerships was discussed. ambassador, you are there and were there a lot of appetite for this, particularly as a reflection was leaked at the same time with china and such a big headline? >> absolutely. there was a lot of discussionon and lauren is actually right with the specificartners so there is a lot of interest to work but it is not only about challenge but from china for
their ia and we should not forget of course that we need china to pticipate in many international initiatives on climate of space that we see with developments that china has been doing. we use them on ard with global arms control and the official intelligence and military buildup. there is the whole set of things where we need china as a challenge for others so it's not just that but formalizing partnerships and not including china mayreate exclusive clubs where it will be more difficult to work so weave to find the right type of solution for it i
also would like to take a few words o mexico that of course for partnerships we need countries to want to have partnerships and appently it's the only country in latin america that has a partnership with columbia and the type of activity and trading and trsformation with mexico it would nee [inaudible] but nato would be interested obvious we don't have fears in brussels wi ambassadors of a numbe of countries there is a dialogue to have a partnership or stronger relationship we need both sides to tango. >> if we people tweet out this
session where you say nato is interested i'm sure you'll get some calls and my other ambassadors and ambassador loot, one of the frustrations especially the united states but also increasingly the uk has been europeans fondness, as lauren mentioned, for doing business with china and their reluctance to give up some of ese deals including most prominently 5g and huawei so i that some thing that will hind hinder, you know, nato's approach to this as well and it certainly on the eu side and this is been a divergence between governments either ambassador, ambassador pierce. >> hello, i think it's really interesting question because i think the pandemic has solidified countries concerns
out china coupled with hong kong which what we see on the week as what we saw in the indian and i think for the fifth me there's actually more among countries that share democratics that we need to push back on authoritarianism and we need to push back on some of what china has been doing but i think the economic question is a different one if i may say so and is not because a chinese company will provide 5 services but it's because there is a nafta diversification and supply and because the chinese companies is linked to the chinese state and the chinese, his party and complicit in its matials and giinformation being given to tht communist party for the purposes
of controlling china citizens and that is the critical issue and it is not that weon't want a sensible economic productive relationship with china but we wanted to be onele that doesn't lead to an extension of the authority of the commonest party and we wanted to be one that is based on the economic and trade level playing field so i think as countries come together and as the u.s. and china and the u.s. and eu develop their [inaudible] on china and as we develop our guide lock on china at this is a level playing field and will be one of the things we need to talk about. it is separate from the need to do a a china in a way that is a strategic competitor. >> ambassador lute.
>> yes, a couple thoughts, if you take the world map and plop the belton road initiative the extend from mainland china east and west and you might ask what is the purpose here. my view is that the destination of the belt and road initiative bothla the land routes in the sa routes is the european marketplace so 500 million people with gdp and they are not building the belton road initiative to get to terse jacket stand but there still is a belton road initiative to get to the european market and we need the commercial filtration of chinese interests so the buying of the seaports and investment in other transportation networks and 5g by way of the tele- communications network, energy networks and so forth. in this commercial competition in europe comes from the chinese perspective with an expectation that downstream after the
commercial based on the commercial and frustration there would be political payoffs so this, i think, military dimension of competition with china. this commercial and political infiltration is the dimension pothat nato in europe and partnersp with the eu ought to be most concerned about and i'm not talking about shifting airplanes and tings but more about technology transfers and , buying up of commercial infrastructure and so forth. nato, alongside the eu needs to wake up to this strategic play th is actually playing out right now is the belt and road initiative begins to reach its destination. >> i think everyone is probably aware by now that nato had not spoken about china until a year ago as a leaders meeting in london and they're trying to catch up or make up for lost
time. i'm looking to the next set of videos and stillpe have time wih dan to come back to any and all questions but let's eat the next three pitches and then we wil talk about. >> along with my colleagues at the center for american progress in pitching the idea of a nato bank. i think about the 2% pledge and nato itself are several years. this issueye isn't new and been naudible] in the wake of the covid-19 pandemic it will be more important than ever before on one hand is likely the alliance will need to continue to meet the challenges of today but most members will be taking top budget choices for the next two years. one way to think creatively
about the budget crunch could be to create a bank. this bunny a precedent for a nato to follow in creating an internal lending institution. i would make an initial investment nearing their exec stent to the royal bank or investment bank and much like institutions the bank should be set up with guard rails and standards forending. this includes due diligence practices to make sure they spent our project in line with nato's standards and vues. primarily the banquette will finance [audible] and help shift the conversation from arbitrary spending goals to addressing critical capability gaps. particularly by providing smaller members that cannot afford to invest on her own or by allowing states and the banquet would serve purposes. it would allow nato to make key strategic investments like bridges and roads and a vast and emerging technologies like 5g, provide realy available funds and help allevte the budgetary pressure act of the pandemic writ ultimate, in the united states and europe will have to take think mor creatively about
the alliance, including how to funded freight although a nato bank will not solve all the problems or settle every internal disagreement about spending or planning for thel future we think it could be a good place to start. >> [inaudible] [inaudible] that's why my co-authors and i propose that nato adopte the ce text on [inaudible] however, we believe prioritizing it is key
in protecting member states against novel threats while also enforcing collective [inaudible]. with this strger mandate we believe nato should increase resilience functional by better engaging the private sector, civil society oti partners forward looking expanding beyond the industries in the baseline requirements and estabshing the dynamic program and importantly funded. developing resiliency similar to career defense spenders. the only constant is change and nato can lean into the presence to prepare and leap forward for the next strategic shock. >> public space within burden sharing have focused too long on
how membe states spend on defense as a whole witho focusing enough on where those funds are going. member states shoul reimagine how to spend and adjust that spending relative to emerging threats and collective security challenges. adversaries are increasingly focused on digital and information threats while some meers are awash in cyber capabilities, others aret. as nato grapples wh how to cyber space and must follow strategy and t ensure funding forybersecurity prioritize nato should adopt a point to% commitment to digitalefense spending. this target would increase by ughly two-three times the ount the most member states spend on cybersecurity and often in defense of saper capabilities. th point toercent should be spent in thr distinct areas enabling all keep abilities on the battlefield and ascending digital systems ranging from laptops to combat aircraft and tranorming the it
infrastructure of the alliance. a modern force like an innovated tech company mt be able to harness, store, secure and store vast amounts of data from anywhere on demand and must wor to develop doctrine and capabilities to conduct cyber and operation and must invest in defending its digital system. a digital poi to% commitment and pressive in a vicious offers a visib pledge and anger states to meaningful contributions toward continual modernization.ow >> okay, some of these, two of these, two out of the three specifically with spending and with money and they are let's start with ambassador lutes of the american on the panel here and the american fastener. you had to go in and deliver these tough messages to allies before about the 2% of defense spending and would you want either to be discussing how much allies should contribute to a
bank in nato's behalf or to be hounding them about zero-point to percent on cyber, regardless of how important we all know the cyber is? probably the united states would be, would be one of the impetus, if not the main impetus, for ending. >> two of the three topics in this section are closely related, the resilience and cyber topics because cyber defense and cybersecurity is a major component of resiliency. i thinke. that the two present occurred, to present goal for defense spending should be brought in the definition should be broadened to provide incentive to invest in the cyber defense related capabilities. the challenge here is that many of these cyber capabilities span the gap between military or
defense ministry of defense spending and other sectors of the national government insides idliance membe. we point to need to be more adaptable here in terms of what counts towar 2% and what does not. let me set those two aside and with regards to the idea of the bank, i think until we secure reliable 2% that would meet the 2% obligation for snding the notion of creating a new pot that is a multi- natural bank i think is a bit of an overshoot. i think we need first to focus on the national spending goals and look, we are six years into the ten year 2% pledge taken at the wales summit where you were there, teri. i think we need to let that manifest and let that mature and
made the 2% goal and then we can take on greater ambitions. in practical terms it's hard to imagine increasing beyond 2% to, for example, create multi national banks, especially in the wake of the financial demands for covid. >> yeah, i thought the same thing. as practical as it sounds when you read this and i would encourage everybody to read all of these essays and they are posted conveniently in our chat here that wouldn't it be easy or nice if every time nato needed some more capabilities that i had a fund already waiting until having to go to allied governments and discuss it. ambassador pierce and ambassador bray's you already come from companies countries that are sent in oh 2% on defense and to either of you think overman could beyo connced to put some of that money in a bank for contingency? or that they would want another ve specific pledge, zero-point
to percent for cyber specified as a nato requirement? or goal? >> i'm quite interested in the notion of digital spending whether it is not zero-point to are not j quite there but certainly of the additional dollars that the uk announced on defense spending a large portion of that is dedicated to the cyber digital side so i think that is a very interesting idea and i would really welcome nato's studying that. i thinkhe idea of a bank, however, changes the nature of the nato alliance and it makes it a diffent sort of institution if you have money and the member states job then becomes t work andllocate that money and run it.
i thank you then end up, having different governments arrangements to take you clor to that european union and the significance of that remember being told by many colleagues who served in both nato and the eu, not british kp colleagues, european colleagues that there is a subtle difference between unanimity which ishe european union requires and consensus which is what nato requires and it is funmentally the switch between what is permitted and what is prohibited. if you have a bank with institutional funding you would end up just because of the need to run that in a certain way you would then end up moving away from consensus and into unanimity and i think then you would end up with a different sort of dynamic in the alliance and my personal view is that better to keep things as they are in funding terms but this nation of spending is very
interesting. >> what you think, ambassador? >> the issue and the link between the cyber and resilience of course ambassador lute is completely right that when we look at and see hostile attacks undethe kinetic cyber attack ey are all linked to resilience and all linked to investments and national responsibilities and all allied responsibilities we look at cyber and of course, w already have cyber defense and cyber is included in the defense so there is or there are tools how to help assess the allied investment priorities and it is not easy or as straightforward with certain types of military capabilities. it requires cooperation from the prive sector and individuals
so if there is a whole society and as we have seen with recent developments also some tire attacks and hacking it does concern t government after themselves and private sector as much as everybody else so the answer tre is yes, government commitment, policies in place, cyber sector aware and collaboration and the individual resilience citizens and of course they are to understand and be aware andrepare to respond if necessary individually and prevent onltiple. on the nato bank we are discussing all types ofovelty ideas and various work themes around the e's emerging technologies and what is the best way to finance quickly and with agility with initiatives
calling for the psychological edge soo' tre is a wishor more normate approach to help finance it and whether that's a bank would b a new novelty way to do that and achieve that goal, as we need, i agree that would probably require ite a strong discussion and serious discussion and may be not be an easy answer. >> lauren, let me -- >> quickly i want to bring lauren and hear. >> on cyber, think nato needs to link much more closely with the eu. the eu required a national cyber assessment from each of its member states and nato has not done that in the eu has sown an institutional toolbox and nato has not quite done that and nato still talks about guidelines, not standards so i think there
is some catch appear. nato needs to be more aggressive with regard to its cyber and conntions to resilience. >> but this is specifically linked to 5g and while way, the toolbox and the assessment of possible vulnerabilities but yeah, you are right. although, many of those countries of course our nato allies there would be some who aren't. lauren, let me bring you in on resilience and in particular, what do you think? when we talk about whether some of these things should be regulated or mandated by nato but the topic of this essay is whether itif should be officialy declared another task of nato appeared when i think of nato's core tasks they all inherently include a need for resilience. do you think this should be specified as yet another core task? >> i think the point on was lands is really important.
as you say, and runs through and permeates across everything nato does and unfortunately i think this has created a little bit of buzz around us where it kinda means something different to everyone and for that reason everyone vigorously nods when you talk about resiliency because we all think is a good thing and i think the challenge is we should incorporate that more specifically into what nato does butd feels intangible and difficult to measure and that's exacerbated by thesu fact that there are so many players involved whether that's national bodies, international institutions or civil society and private sector and they contribute to resilienceen and different ways and there is no one-size-fits-all because it looks difrent to each actor and requires a context and that scale to make it massively expensive and there is no to drive this resources behind it
and nato could do this and deould do this and i think we have a lot more to do in terms of defining exactly what we need and nato pledges talk about providing public services during disasters and crises and bears the context of societal resilience to disinformation or resilience and critical infrastructure but i think it's probably a combination of all of those things but we need to determine where are our exact goals and who is responsible for doing what and that stuff is important but one thing i'm encouraged about is that in october when nato defense ministers did agree to strengthen the allied resilience pledge for nato leaders meet next year and i think that started to lay the groundwork for the ability here and about codifying and what exactly we are trying to do and get ahead ofou church ox and not think of it so much as a reaction but
as preventative. maybe, if i could, i don't want to get ahead of you but since we brought that up in a couple different contexts already one thing we haven't talked about is the essay on cyber mentioned the importance of offense of capabilities and i think that is a tricky conversation to the nato contacts because nato is a defensive alliance but i think what we need to recognize is that the alliance is already suffering attacks from russia and china whether that is cyberspace and critical infrastructure intrusion and cyber espionage and intellectual property theft and disinformation in all these things have an impact on nato and their nations and infrastructure that are capabilities and military forces rely. to some extent, were already behind in some way that these things are happening and they merit a response. you could argue that nato could be doing more to take an active defense or to do things that might be considered offensive capabilities the more portly i
think the point that nations made offensive capabilities and even if nato is not the platform to orchestrate a counteroffensive nato nations have already volunteered and i think it's nine of them have volunteered to employ offensive coordinated activities so i think using this as a framework is a more aggressive and concrete spending target in digital and i think that could help us get there to get ahead of the curve and not just focus on cyber defense and resilience by developing offensive capabilities independently and in conjunction with dimensional cube abilitiesin. >> when cyber was declared an operational dominion if so much more leeway to even talk about offensive and to be prepared for offensive measures [inaudible]
spirit right, i was going to say below the article five social nato needs to get more comfortable and difficult and not overuse do but and to stay ahead in the strategic competition we need too be operating before these things reach the article five threshold. >> and just to go back -- >> go-ahead, ambassador. >> it's also important to remember w do exercise cyber exercises and do separate and all the teams and all sides and there is a lot around political sensitivity on retribution and many other things but allies have improved a great dl of corporations and it's crucial. they used power in a lot of cases and what they have done actually helped but national
responsibility and involving the private sector and individual citizens using groups will be crucial to rlly to deter and defend in situations. >> it has come a long way in the discussion and i can member years ago when we were discussing cyber no country wanted to share in capabilities or its own defensive capabilities and so obviously the willingness of allies to remember that cyber attack on one of them is a cyb attack on all and everyone has linked systems and that has come a long, long way and i know that ambassador pierce has to leave at 4:30 so i l want to just geta coup of questions from the audienceie because i appreciate
them hanging in herend we saw we had 20 questions in a q&a so i feel terrible about not getting to all of them but let me start with my friend who asked and this is a key question that we did mention, including this last round about the eu as a partner of nato going forward and this is sething that comes up constantly as nato reviews the strategic concept and are these procees complementary or contradictory so anyone who would like to take that. >> let me just weigh in on this, i have long thought that of partnerships between nato and the eu was be that national thing in the world and give a common geography and common challenges and now we have 21 common members and i think that
the steps taken recently to look more closely the policy that is the north atlantic council from nato dealing with pse at the eu really makes much more sense so i would like to see the next generation, especially as we deal with things that are below the purely military threshold we talked about resilience and cyber and 5g and chinese competition and all of those bridged the boundaries between the two large organizations and i think in the nexteneration will move much more closely together. >> ambassador from nato's perspective. >> but contact that we have is literallyvery day and there are, of course, aas that we work in a sort of agreement based but the threats don't
separate thepa organizationo when allies or companies we have to be able to respond and that is the national means and especially in this disinformation and hostile information also of course politicall we think of the concepts we a there are no doubts about that and the question is to the point so as i mentioned the eu does benefit e allied resilience or helps the company's in a cerin pruction way to set the standards sohat nato does is the standardization and again is the sam way our economic power increases and ability and capabilities and the society so
there are a lot of links with nato to work together. >>nother to that would want to weigh in on that or should i present one more question here? okay, i'll take a second question. >> is ambassador pierce still with us? of course, with brexit- with brexit. >> i can answer on brexit. ukleaving the european union is not going to change one iota our commander commitment to european and atlantic security. we word very well be there when there is brexit to europe. only the euro atlantic area and
this newew defense spending increased that we've announced derscored british determination to keep moving forward in nato and to work as quickly asossible as i suspect the ambassador said with the european union and there are some dangers to be honest and we take our eyes off what the common threat is and that is the common threat to the euro atlantic are and i think sometimes they are a little sanguine about russian intentions to be honest b i think the more we debate among ourselves more time for the last time we have two aress the wider threats around the globe and we talked about some of those, cyber, china, russia, nonstate actors and i see the question of nato first in the
european union as a distraction from what i call for organizations which is defined at mutual reinforcing way to address the issues of security and stability and provide for prosperity and i think nato is always going to b at the harder edge of the security equation. the european uon will always be the institution more interested in more capable of giving something on the prosperity side and those things are not mutually exclusive but on the exactly opposite that they are mutually reinforcing. >> unfortunately, we run o of time and tha will be our last mment but it was quite comprehensive and i would very much like to think my panel, lauren, ambassador pierce and fastener loot for joining us but
especially to our young authors who have such a greatdeas and very inspiring to me and i feel so privileged to have been with the series but i hopeou all check out on thetlantic council website, nato 2020 and all the essays are there and every week release a new podcast where we have discussions just like this with the authors let them go into much more depth and shame me wit their billions and a wonderful experience butll thk you to all of us and the atlantic council for launching this program and we got a great initiative and thank you to everyone who joined us online and continued t conversation on twitter and # stronger with allies and we will try to go there and answer your questions and continue to discuss these new ideas for the next decade and beyond. thank you s much to my panel and to everyone. >> u.s. senate will gavel in later today and back at
3:00 p.m. eastern lmakers are expected to continu work on the nomination of thomas hurt to be thjudge of a seventh ccuit court of appeals. he would replace amy coney barrett on the circuit. a vote to advance the nominion will occur at 5:30 p.m. eastern. watchive senates coverage right here on c-span2. the house is not in session and mbers are waiting for the latest covid relief agrment reached late last night to be officially broht to the floor. the nations electoral college meets tay to officially cast their ballots for president and vice president. we are live from a number of states today, including mhigan and texas. tonight we will have a complete rep of the day's events as well as live remarks from president-elect joe biden starting at 8:00 p.m. eastern and over on our computer network c-span. >> later this afternoon several senators are expected to unveil
a bipartisan plan and two covid-19 emergen relief bills watch live coverage of their news conference beginning at 4:00 p.m. easternn c-span. >> food and drug demstration reads in open session for a vaccine and live coverage thursday and 9:00 a.m. eastern on c-span3. stream livend on-demand at c-span .org or listen on the free c-span radio app. >> with coronavirusases increasing across the country use our wsite c-span .or / coronavirus to follow the trends, track the spread with interactive maps and watch updates on demd, anytime at c-span .org / coronavirus. >>tonight unlike me to gators journalist and author james paul discusses his book, the tangled
web we weave about the history of the internet and tod's problems, including pvacy, ownership d monopoly power. >> we look at thisechnology that keeps creating monopolies and that keeps creatin the biggest businesses in the world, all fiv of the world's biggest publicly listed companies are te companies and we've got to go how come the internet is seen has to equalizers and connectors but how come it keeps creatin these really powerful companies and really powerful individuals? >>watch the communicators tonight at 80 p.m. eastern on c-span2. >> u.s. senate about to gavel and to start their week. today lawmakers will work on the nomination of thomas kirsch to succeed amy coney barrett as a judge on the seventh circuit court of appeals. a vote to advance the nomination is