NATO Summit 2023 Leaders’ Discussion at NATO Forum Transcript

– face in the United States is the notion of burden sharing and having everyone recognize this is a historic opportunity for us to build capabilities that the Ukraine invasion have obviated. There are areas that NATO needs to invest more in. There are areas that each member country of NATO must invest more in. And if we can come away from this conference and future conferences demonstrating that we understand what those vulnerabilities are, we understand areas of stress that have come over the last 18 months then I’m completely convinced that we’ll continue to have majority support among Republicans and Democrats. Even amongst the parties, we have our concerns, but I believe that they’re all manageable in a democratic country like the United States. And I believe that our support for NATO, our support for the Ukraine effort will continue.

(01:14)
But make no mistake about it, the single greatest political risk that we have is not having the member nations of NATO satisfy, not only, it’s not a number, it suggests a capability, it suggests a capacity, and we understand each one of us what those deficiencies are, and we need to show progress there. With that progress there’s no doubt in my mind that the 75 year Alliance will be 150 year alliance.

Thank you, Senator. Senator Shaheen, can I also ask you sort of to tackle the same question, but I also want to take up a specific issue where parliaments have played a role, not just in the sort of broad sense, but in a very specific sense. We know that one of Turkey’s requests was congressional support for F16 sales and given last night’s developments, I’m just curious as to how you see the mood in Congress having changed and whether the decisive shift is underway and what that means.

Well, just to reinforce what Senator Tillis said, we have a strong bipartisan delegation here from the Senate, and we are here to show our support for NATO, to show our support for continuing to do everything we can to support the courageous Ukrainians in this unprovoked war against Russia. So that is the reason we’re here. And we agree, and I’m really pleased to hear you say that the Parliamentary assembly agrees that the 2%, what we hope will be a floor, not a ceiling, is important to every country because we need to make sure that we continue to have the capability that we see is so important.

(03:04)
After the fall of the Berlin Wall and the dissolution of the Soviet Empire, I think we had what we call the peace dividend. We thought, well, we don’t have to prepare to fight anymore. We don’t have to prepare for conflict. And what this Ukrainian war has shown us, very starkly, is that that is not the case, that we do have to prepare. I was very pleased to hear another breakthrough with Turkey on Sweden’s accession into NATO. It’s something that we think, I think should have happened much faster. And I think there was sentiment, Senator Tillis and I led a letter in the Senate earlier this year to say that we are very concerned about providing F16s and other military equipment to Turkey as long as the ratification of Sweden hangs out there. So I think that it would be very problematic, as important a NATO ally as I think Turkey is, and they are important, I think President Erdogan’s movement on Sweden, I hope is the next step in ensuring that Sweden is ratified into NATO in the coming weeks.

Thank you, Senator. I’m going to, in a moment, turn to the floor and I’ll select questions by hands up in a moment. So think of your questions. But before I do that, I want to just very quickly address a rather simple question to all of you, and it’s the one that is here on my iPad from our virtual audience. But it’s also the question that’s kind of hung over every panel here, which is when do you think Ukraine will be able to join NATO?

(04:52)
And the question I have is we don’t know the precise language we’ll see in the communique, but I think it’s fair to say we have a sense it may not go as far as Ukrainians and their more sort of advocates would like in terms of extending an invitation and offering a concrete specific rapid, credible pathway. And I’m just curious as to view your views on whether you think the balance is being struck appropriately right now, or whether mistakes are being made. So Madam Speaker, perhaps I could start with you and go this way.

Yes. Well, it’s easy for me to speak as I’m one of those that you refer to as advocates of Ukraine. And as well, of course, the parliament that I represent. So back in April, on April the sixth, Lithuania became the first parliament that voted unanimously on a resolution that stated specific aims of this NATO Summit. And among those was invitation to Ukraine to become a member of Alliance. So speaking today, just at the moment when the exact wording is being decided on, I can repeat that.

(05:59)
I think a very clear commitment to Ukraine on behalf of Alliance is something that is necessary today. A very clear commitment, not just on invitation in the membership, but also on practical support, military support. Ukraine has to win, and the sooner it wins, the better. Better for all of us in the West, better for our Alliance. And I think the only chance, only thing that Russia is betting on is a long, difficult war that will put strain on our strategic patience, that will be undeniably affected by changes of our political cycles. And well, we have a window of opportunity that would really be a pity. Well, more than a pity to miss.

Madam Senator.

Totally agree. This is exactly what I told the heads of state earlier. [inaudible 00:06:59] parliamentary assembly is 100% in favor of the accession of NATO. And we want this accession to arrive as soon as possible. We know there are problems. We know that within the NATO framework, we cannot accept a country which is at war. It is a principle. So that’s why also we need to win this war as soon as possible and we need to have all the efforts we can put on the table to help Ukraine to win that war as soon as possible. But I’ve also demanded, and obviously I’m talking in the name of my assembly, that a very clear path is put forward to say how we are going to achieve that. Obviously it’s impossible to say when it’ll happen, but what’s important is that a clear path is being drafted and that also we afford security guarantees to Ukraine and not only to Ukraine, we got to consider the other countries of the region. And I’m thinking of Moldova.

(08:12)
I mean there are other threats. We talk about Ukraine, but there’s also Belarus. I mean, there’s a huge [inaudible 00:08:21] regarding the whole geographical situation in that area, but we want to really present that’s what we are doing. In North Parliament, we’ve adopted resolutions in order to do just that, to push our governments to try to go as quickly as we can for Ukraine to become a member. This is so important, but Ukraine has got to win the war. And two, we’ve got to be able to help it. And I want to thank all the governments and all the states who have been very united. I know it’s difficult.

(08:58)
I know we have that problem in France. We weren’t able to give as many munitions as we wanted to because there was just a practical problem. We never, ever thought that a war with Ukraine would happen. Never thought about it. And I must thank our Lithuanian and Baltic states, colleagues who were the only ones to say, “Be careful, you are being naive.” And yes, we were naive. We never ever thought a war could happen on the European soil. We never thought that Russia would do such a stupid thing as invading Ukraine. But now, we’ve got to do everything we can.

Thank you. Senator Sheen.

Well, I basically agree with that sentiment, that it’s in NATO’s interest to do everything it can to support Ukraine in ending the war. It’s in democracies around the world and all of our interests that Ukraine is able to win this war.

And so a clear path for joining NATO is important. A piece of that though also is the democratic reforms that are part of NATO. And I think Ukraine has continued to move along that path in a way that’s very important. We need to continue to support them. We need to continue to support not just humanitarian aid, all of the military equipment that we’ve talked about, but also the potential to rebuild Ukraine after this war is over. And that’s been part of these discussions here at NATO.

Are there any specific democratic reforms you have in mind?

Well, I think corruption is one of the worst challenges that so many countries are facing. And we need to make sure that we’ve addressed that corruption wherever it exists, whether it’s in a new democracy or an older democracy. So that’s one certainly. Making sure that human rights are addressed in the country is another important issue.

Thank you. Senator Tillis?

I would just add to what Senator Shaheen … and I agree with what my colleagues have said. I think we should also keep in mind too, think about your country being under attack. You could easily and rightfully focus on those challenges. Hello? Hello?

Ah, we have a backup. We have a backup here.

Oh, excellent. I felt like Madonna. So for those of you who serve or follow legislative politics, think about having the pressure of a country that is committing war crimes, occupying you illegally, and yet your parliaments meet to focus on the very reforms that we’re talking about. We’re talking about the rule of law, we’re talking about corruption, we’re talking about separate, co-equal branches of government, the sorts of norms that we all expect. The fact that they’re taking up that legislation when they’re under the threat of being attacked demonstrates to me Ukraine’s commitment to achieving exactly what they need to be a member of NATO.

(12:23)
There’s work to be done, but in spite of the fact for a year and a half they’ve been occupied, and in spite of all that we know that’s gone on there, it suggests to me that we have government leaders who are committed to the very reforms. So here we have to continue to sustain the effort, we have to beat Putin, we have to support Ukraine. We have to sustain that, and we have to make it very clear to Vladimir Putin that NATO and the family of countries, nearly 50 that are supporting the effort now, are here for the long term. And that’s not a proposition Putin can win.

Thank you very much. Okay, I will now take questions. I’ll do them three at a time. So there’s one at the back over there, one over there. Please, if you could make your way to the microphones. And was there any from over this side of the hall? Yeah, over there, please. Dominic Tiller, I think that’s you over there. Thanks. Please go ahead.

Thank you very much indeed, [inaudible 00:13:15]. Benjamin Tallis, German Council on Foreign Relations. It seems as though there’s a large spread agreement in the room about what is the right solution for European security ultimately, but how do we actually get there? In a time of constrained budgets, why are we choosing the most expensive path? In a high time of heightened insecurity, why are we choosing the most insecure path to get there? What are the obstacles that we therefore have to overcome and where do they lie in Washington, in Berlin, and elsewhere? Thank you.

Please go ahead.

Thank you. Alex [inaudible 00:13:47], member of the Parliament of Ukraine. Taking into account in environmental threats, look [inaudible 00:13:55], awful catastrophe, nuclear threats from Russia, I think that formula that NATO will defend every inch of its territory looks a little bit outdated. It’s impossible to do it just from NATO territory. So taking into account that Russia is deploying nuclear weaponry just several kilometers from here in Belarus, isn’t it the time for United States to deploy a nuclear weaponry in Eastern Europe, including Ukraine? Thank you.

Hello everyone. My name is Maria. I’m the managing director of Young Professionals in Foreign Policy. And I’m going to bring this back a little bit to the grassroots support and ask you about young peoples’ involvement. And it’s a two part question. One part is, do you think young people are doing enough, engaged enough in security and defense topics, and especially in NATO topics? And the second part is, is NATO and local governments’ parliaments doing enough to engage young people and listen to young people when it comes to these topics? Because we are the future who is going to be leading the countries, leading NATO. So is enough being done to listen to young people right now?

And let’s have that last question too, please.

Thank you. Thank you very much. I’m [inaudible 00:15:17]. I’m from the Department of War Studies at Kings College in London. And I have a question which relates very much to public support for our actions in Ukraine. And as parliamentarians, I think this is one of the key issues. I mean, how do we ensure that publics in Europe and in North America sort of continue with a sort of unwavering support of our efforts in Ukraine? I think that we face serious challenges. Politicians are exploiting the issue. There is sometimes politicians which exploit sort of anti-Americanism, as was mentioned. And I mean one of our biggest wars is if this war continues, that there is going to be a loss of support.

(16:00)
So what kind of arguments can we bring? What kind of narratives and arguments can we put forward to convince those elements in the publics in NATO countries which need some kind of reassurance that their efforts, their sacrifices are really worth it? For many, this is very clear, but for others it’s a real challenge that we are constantly having to explain, myself included. And I think that it’s very important that we try to develop a sort of line of argument and narrative that really penetrates and explains in a very powerful way, why this effort, the support of Ukraine is essential for our security. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you for all those excellent questions. I’ll go this way. Senator Tillis, I’ll begin with you. And we don’t all have to tackle all the questions, but I think it would be good if you started with perhaps the punchiest of all of those, which was is it time to deploy nuclear weapons to Eastern Europe? And I realize it’s not up to the Senate to decide such a thing on its own, but this is the question of Europe’s NATO nuclear posture is a live one. We have a very good panel on this coming up later in the afternoon, so would love to hear your views on that to begin with.

I’m not sure I’m there yet. And I’m glad to see my friend, we saw each other. He is from Ukraine, Ukraine parliamentarian, and I think he’s making this right sort of request. I’m not really sure that I’m there yet. And the reason is Ukraine is doing such an extraordinary job fighting a war that Russia thought was going to be over in two weeks. I think that we could easily create distractions away from continuing to sustain what has been an extraordinary performance on Ukraine’s part. So I think that, in my opinion, with all due respect to my friend, that’s a discussion for another day, but I think we run the risk of taking our attention off of a strategy that’s working, and then also potentially even dividing parliaments over an issue that I don’t believe is material to our success strategy in Ukraine.

Senator?

Well, I agree with that. I don’t think it’s … one of the things that I think the world is very concerned about is the potential to use nuclear weapons. And I don’t think we help that debate by putting nuclear weapons in Eastern Europe. And I would hope that we would do everything we can to try and get Vladimir Putin to stop using rhetoric around tactical nuclear weapons. And the best way to do that is to continue to support Ukraine in this unjust, unprovoked war. And I would agree with the last questioner, who talked about how do we continue to build support in a democracy for this kind of an effort? Well, I would argue that it’s going to be a lot cheaper to defeat Vladimir Putin in Ukraine than if he comes into Lithuania or the Baltics or Poland or other parts of Eastern Europe.

(19:20)
And I’m concerned that if he wins in Ukraine, he is not going to stop. And that’s going to cost us a lot more money than supporting Ukraine. I had a meeting with a number of women of the Ukrainian military last fall, and one of the things one of them said to me that has resonated so much that I say to my constituents, she said, “Give us the weapons in Ukraine so we can fight the Russians so that you don’t have to.” And when I say that to my constituents in New Hampshire, they understand that. They know that it’s important for us as a democracy to support this effort.

Offered and it’s not… There isn’t a one size fits all answer for everybody. This is a debate that we’ve got to continue to have with our constituents on a regular basis. And as leaders and parliamentarians, it’s up to us to continue to make this case and to do it until Ukraine has won this war.

Senator.

Here again. I totally agree. But first of all about nuclear weapons. That, I would totally disagree at that stage for the reasons you said, but also because we’ve got already nuclear deterrence in Europe. Britain and France do have this nuclear deterrence and this is a very strong situation force and Putin is very aware of that obviously. And I really don’t think he would do such a stupid thing. But he’s done other stupid things obviously before with Ukraine. But I don’t think we should go further and we should concentrate, as you both said, on the winning strategy and helping Ukraine the best way.

(21:08)
Regarding the other questions, yes, young people should be much more informed about the issues of defense and the risk for all democracy. And that’s what we have to fight for. There’s a lot of fake news, disinformation coming from the Russian side, which is gaining territory. In fact, I’m present very soon a report on fake news and Russian disinformation to the NATO parliamentary assembly. It’s incredible to see how good they are at it. And we need to be even better to promote the democracy because the risk is enormous.

(21:49)
As you said, if we lose Ukraine, all the other countries in the area are at risk. But it will go even further. Obviously we know that China is looking extremely carefully at what’s happening with Ukraine. As you know, there’s a very strong question with Taiwan and we’ve got to be very careful about what’s happening in that area of the world as well. And that’s why we’ve got to win this war. I’m sorry, I feel I’m repeating myself all the time, but this is so important that we’ve got to do it now and make as many efforts as we can to win it now.

(22:30)
And that’s why we are working within NATO parliamentary assembly with all of parliamentarians, that I know there are some members of the bureau who are somewhere here coming from different countries and obviously we all agree on that. And really the message is democracy. Democracy is so important. It’s a word which has been losing some of its appeal for many young people do as well to all this disinformation. But it’s very easy to compare the situation within all countries in Europe and in North America, and what’s happening in the countries where there’s a autocratic regime. And the difference is just so obvious. We don’t have these 3000 Belarus prisoners just because they dare to say they didn’t agree with what the autocratic President Lukashenko was doing and saying. This is unacceptable. And I think that all young people can understand that and they will help us. They will understand and they will help us put forward that idea.

(23:50)
Because yes, in Africa as well, we see China and Russia at work trying to present some ideas which are wrong and using all of fragilities, because that’s a problem of the democracies as well. It’s an interesting problem. We are fragile because we respect everybody and we want to work together and that’s what it’s all about. But there’s a lot of work to be done and discussions to be held, but we parliamentarians are doing it as much as we can.

Thank you. Madam Speaker.

Yes. Well, on a slightly provocative, but also a very logical question on nuclear weapons. I think, well, it’s a good point that it is supposed and was supposed to work as a deterrent, but well, we cannot fail to see that Russia has been using nuclear weapon with impunity and it is logical that the more countries will want to acquire it as a means of defense if we continue giving into blackmail of Russia. Well, there is no other way to put a stop to it than to say very clearly, very loudly without any shadow of doubt, that nuclear blackmail does not work on us because else we open up the whole new sort of alley of debate that well, it sounds like we would rather not have.

(25:20)
On engagement of youth. I think there is a very good saying that probably rings as true as ever now, that every generation has to win democracy. So for the young generation right now, well there is no better example. Also, no more emotionally compelling example than seeing their counterparts in Ukraine go to defend their motherland, their country, their freedom, their democratic future on the front or well, even unfortunately dying and completely brutal and also senseless terroristic attacks of Russia. Well, if that cannot bring this urgency, then really nothing can. And I believe looking at least to the youth in our country, in our region, that well, the support for NATO being record high, the support for transatlantic bond being record high, I think that there is this understanding and that we have every reason to look at our young people with a lot of hope that they will continue and perhaps continue in a more efficient, effective way, an emotional engaged way than we did for a while, when it looked like we were almost at the so-called end of history.

(26:43)
And speaking of the engagement of people in the course of supporting Ukraine and the course of being on the side of NATO about the skepticism, well, I believe if there is any kind of silver lining to the brutal attack of Russia, is that newly founded, well, reinvigorated bond we have with our transatlantic partners. I think the understanding that the project, the security architecture that has been created after Second World War, which is very much a common project, and that the United States of America has invested so much in, is actually under threat and that we are all in. And our citizens, our constituents, can hear this from us parliamentarians. And I think that while spreading this message is perhaps a single most important thing that we can do right now.

Okay, thank you. I think we have a little bit more time for questions. Anyone else would like to ask one? Just at the front over there and at the back over there. Please, if you two could make your way to the microphones.

Thank you very much for-

We can hear you.

It’s okay?

Can everyone hear? Yes, I think so.

I listen very, very carefully what honorable parliamentarians say, and I see their support, parliamentarian support for NATO, and grassroots support for NATO is exactly what the honorable senator from Newham say, that we need to explain to the people, you need to explain to your people, because the people provide the legitimacy of your efforts and of your decision. And I like to put another dimension of another organization that maybe you know is-

Could we have a brief question, please, because we’ve got such little time. I want to make sure we have enough time for answers.

Yeah. Okay. Very quick. I like to mention the Atlantic Treaty Association. Many of the participant here come from the Atlantic councils of their respective country of the association [inaudible 00:28:58] Atlantic of the Greek Association and is exactly who we support is a citizen society that support and give the legitimacy to your efforts and to NATO.

So this is [inaudible 00:29:16] Ukraine. I heard an idea of our French colleagues that there is my kind of proposal to have security guarantees not only to Ukraine, but also to Moldova, as far as I understand. Could you please celebrate more because I have never heard of that idea? So do you see that Moldova have to be a kind of supplied by here weaponry like Ukraine is, or maybe some other form of security guarantees given that they also have occupied territory. Thank you.

Okay. Madam [inaudible 00:29:48], I want to start with you please, and I’ll change the order around.

Obviously we are worried about Moldova. It’s enough to look at the map of the region to see that Moldova is at risk because obviously

It’s an access to the maritime area, and there is also this Transnistria region, which is under Russian leadership, and this is a fragile area. That’s why we are doing a lot to support Moldova. I’ve been there several times. I mean, we are really trying to help as much as we can the country because we’ve got a Democratic president who’s being attacked by the Russian-minded and Russian supporters, and we have to be very, very strong about it and put as much as we can in order to help Moldova as well. But it’s not the only country at risk. But Moldova, in my mind, in all minds, would be the first one at risk. I’m not sure I totally understood your question and so I’m not sure I’ve answered fully to your question, but…

That’s fine. We have such little time. We’ll be fine.

Fine.

Sorry, I’m-

Which kind of security guarantees concretely to Moldova apply?

Well, first of all, we’ve got-

Sorry, we have be very brief, I’m afraid.

Yes.

We have such little time left.

First of all, we’ve got to help from an economic point of view, because a country which is fragile from an economic point of view is fragile from a security point of view. And then obviously, we’ve got NATO forces on the eastern flank, especially with troops in Romania and the eastern part of Romania, and it’s also with Moldova in mind, but obviously, we support NATO countries. NATO can only be in NATO countries, but we have reinforced the security of that area, and [inaudible 00:31:44] an important security we’ve been doing.

[inaudible 00:31:47] speaker in less than a minute.

Just a few words on Moldova. Of course it is a very important country, well on its European way, and I think the main task is to actually help it to become the full-fledged member of the European Union. It makes a great effort, and of course, well, here speaking in the NATO forum, it’s a parallel track, but it’s very closely interconnected.

(32:16)
Well, when looking back some 20 years ago, I am very happy that back then Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia became members of both EU and members of NATO, because else imagine that we would have another gray zone here when we have flourishing democracies sharing the same principles and values with our Euro-Atlantic alliance and community. Same goes for Moldova, which is well underway, and of course, we cannot overlook or forget Belarus, who is under Lukashenko’s regime, but which is also a European country that belongs in the future to Europe. So of course, victory in Ukraine will also mean a change in Belarus, and we have to not forget that.

Senators, rather than ask you to repeat some of these themes, I just want to end by asking you something we really should not leave without addressing, which is the subject of Asia and NATO’s engagement with Asian partners. I want to ask you both, are you satisfied, content, with what you’ve heard from European partners on their approach to Asia and particularly the challenges posed by China given the language last year, or do you think this falls short, given lingering opposition we still have to a Tokyo office, for instance? Senator Tillis.

I think that the outcome of the Madrid Conference and the strategic concept and the collective recognition of China’s emerging threat was a great start. I think the fact that we have four countries here from the Indo-Pacific region is also another indication that the world is small and that we have to take all of these threats seriously, and I think we’re sharing a mutual interest. So I think we made progress last year. I think we’re making continuous progress. When you have countries in Indo-Pacific wanting to potentially open offices, I know that that may take some time, but start thinking about how that area of responsibility has shared interest with Europe and with the United States is a very good start. I think it’s a good trend and it will continue to build.

Thank you. Senator Shaheen, can you offer us some concluding thoughts on that subject?

Well, I think the threats are connected. So make no mistake, our adversaries, whether it’s China, North Korea, Iran, they’re watching what happens to Ukraine. They’re watching what happens to the Transatlantic Alliance and whether we can stay together to support our ally. And so we need to recognize that it’s all connected and we’ve got to work together. And that’s, I think, what NATO is looking at, not just in terms of the strategic concept that mentioned China, but also in looking at cyber threats, looking at environmental climate threats, all of that, because it’s not just the threats that we can see next door, but there are other threats, and NATO is looking at how we can work together to address those.

Thank you so much. We’ve covered an enormous number of topics, everything from NATO’s defense posture to winning the argument with publics to the extended neighborhood, Moldova to the Asia-Pacific region, and all that’s left is for me to ask you to please join me in thanking our panelists today.