>> batter up, time to play ball, get ready to cheer on your favorite teams in the congressional baseball game where republicans face off against democrats want to live play-by-play coverage washington nationals park on wednesday at 7:00 p.m. eastern on c-span, c-span now, or online at c-span.org. >> deep into left field, bouncing up and into the bullpen. >> the house will be in order. >> we celebrate 45 years of covering congress like no other, since 1979, we have been the primary source for capitol hill, providing balanced and unfiltered coverage of government. taking you to where the policies

, debates are decided with the support of american cable companies. c-span, 45 years and counting, powered by cable. >> the atlantic council commemorated the 75th anniversary of the nato which was established on april 4th, 1949, in this first portion of the event, the palace reflect on the history of nato and purpose and how nato benefits the average american. they preview the upcoming nato summit that will take place in washington, d.c. over the summer. ♪

behalf of the atlantic council, it is my pleasure to welcome you to the event today, nato at 75, and alliance for a safer world. my name is jenna ben-yehuda , 75 years ago today, 12 countries came together to sign the washington treaty. marking the very beginning of what would become the world's most powerful and successful military alliance. in 1949, nato was founded to provide collective security and prevent the outbreak of another world war. in the 75 years that followed, nato has welcomed 20 additional allies, all committed to safeguarding democratic values and promoting peace and stability in the euro atlantic region and beyond. this anniversary is unquestionably a moment to take stock and celebrate the accomplishments of the most successful alliance in history.

these celebrations are taking place against a backdrop of tremendous uncertainty. war is raging in europe, global security environment is increasingly volatile. now more than ever it is imperative for nato allies to stand together and reaffirm their collective support, secure peaceful and democratic global community. today is not just a chance to reflect on the past but also a moment to consider the next 75 years converging challenges for climate change, to emerging technologies, while fundamentally altering the battlefield of tomorrow. the alliance must always be focused on the future and adapted to the present. for that reason, meetings such as this one are integral for strategy and security, which needs to develop sustainable nonpartisan strategies to address the most important

security challenges facing the united states and the world. the center honors nonpartisan commitment to security, support for u.s. leadership, cooperation with allies and partners, and dedication to the mentorship of the next generation of leaders. as part of this mission, the center's transatlantic security initiative influences the debate on the gray security challenges facing the alliance and its partners. today's event is part of the atlantic council's programming organized in the 2024 nato summit in washington, so be on the lookout for more coming up from the council in the coming months . in the spirit, we have organized two panels, the first brings together a group of atlantic council experts to highlight the alliance's steward underpinnings and celebrate the enduring legacy.

the second panel will look to feature the voices of the next generation of experts and leaders to discuss how nato can secure its feature for the next 75 years. the first panel will be moderated by my college, dr. matthew h. kroenig, vice president and senior director of the atlantic council. thank you all so much for being here with us today. i will pass it to you, matt. >> thank you for that introduction and welcome. the anniversary provides a valuable opportunity to look back at the accomplishments of native over the past 75 years and into the future to make sure the lights remains well for the challenges ahead. i am very fortunate to be toward by a distinguished panel , directly to my left, ambassador paula j. dobriansky, vice chair of the atlantic

council , a senior fellow at harvard university and a former undersecretary of state for global affairs. to her left, ian brzezinski, senior fellow and the transatlantic security mission at the scowcroft center, in the europe center, and a former deputy assistant secretary of defense for europe and nato policy. to his left, elisabeth braw , senior fellow and transatlantic security initiative at the atlantic council, and to her left, dr. john deni, professor at the u.s. army war college and a senior fellow in the transatlantic security initiative. welcome to you all and thank you for joining us. a few housekeeping notes, the discussion is on the record, we will leave time for audience questions at the end. we encourage participants to

join the conversation. there is a standing microphone in the room for those of you in person , and, for virtual participants, locker questions on x, follow @atlanticcouncil. let's begin the discussion. ian, we will start with you. we think a lot about nato but maybe not everybody thinks about nato every day. what is nato and what does it do? >> thank you for hosting this panel on this important anniversary, 75 years as a long time and that testifies about the atlantic growing from 12 to now 32. nato serves as the institutional core of the

transatlantic community democracies. it was established to mobilize and orchestrate a combined political, economic, and military power of these democracies and it has done that with great effect. note for its role of a military institution, deterring our adversaries. in this regard, the lights has been successful in enabling nato and the transamerica meeting to win the cold war without firing a shot. allied forces operating sometimes under the nato flag in afghanistan or in iraq, effectiveness and courage rooted in the camaraderie and collectivist posture from nato. alliance is backed by $55 trillion in gdp. almost half if not more than

half of global gdp, 10 times that of russia, more than twice of china. also, the political legitimacy that comes from democracy. i believe that is a force multiplier. a message to our adversaries, these military, economic, ideological advantages are exactly what nato brings to the table an important in an age of increasing complexity, increasing danger, and -- >> thank you. you mentioned some of the accomplishments, winning the cold war without firing a shot, that is where i want to continue looking back at the history. ambassador, let come to you next . looking over the 75 years, what are the major challenges the alliance had to overcome and what are the major accomplishments? >> let me also give my thanks to the atlantic council, to

jenna, for opening, for you for moderating, and as we go forward to the summit, this summer, hosted by the united states, what are the challenges and accomplishments? i look back, let's not take it for granted, first 12 when it was the north atlantic treaty, now 32. one of the challenges, expansion. there were many debates and discussions about it. by the way, if you asked me at this time in my lifetime, what i expect finland or sweden to become members, i was not sure that would happen in my lifetime and here we are. not just the expansion of core members, but in terms of the

number of nato nonmembers across the globe, also a very significant attachment and investment to the very purpose of the alliance. one was the question of enlargement, which has moved forward rather thoughtfully and strategically and successfully. there is the issue of burden sharing, we will dive more into that and let me say that, the question of, what member states put into it i will fast-forward, given the kind of discussion the states have taken place, i look at where we are now, over half of the members are investing over 2% at minimum and even over. we had recently the foreign minister of poland who was here speaking at the council and mentioned the fact that poland

is putting 4% of its gdp and challenging other countries as nato members. this has been the issue. it has moved substantially and significantly in the right direction. it is a shared and burden sharing. let me mention, another, i remember the big debates about out of area. nato was focused on just the region for all the reasons ian stated. should it have a role? afghanistan loomed large years back. here we are, at this time, i am struck by the fact that the nato secretary-general actually has been speaking to the issue about the threat from the indo- pacific, referring to china in particular and what role native could have -- nato could have. the fact it has been so unified

and successful in terms of the region, but it is looking at what role it can play beyond. that was a challenge before and now it is one that actually is presenting engagement. it is a question before nato and the future, and i think we will dive into that in our discussion. what does that mean? for nato? on this anniversary, i was struck by the fact that the secretary-general mentioned all of the challenges that are confronting the global community . he said, i am proud that we are a stronger alliance, and because of these very challenges , we are a stronger alliance. even from what we were at the beginning. >> wonderful, thank you, ambassador. sticking with the history, elizabeth, and our ceo has a

new piece out today about the 75th anniversary. he argues that one of the damages that the founders of nato had, the memories of world war ii were still fresh and that was a motivator. he quotes president truman when he signed the nato treaty on april 4th, 1949. he said, twice in recent years nations have felt the sickening blow of unprovoked aggression, our people to whom our governments are responsible, demand these things shall not happen again, we are determined they shall not happen again. how important was the recent memory of world war ii in the founding of nato and how current nato leaders maybe have forgotten those lessons, maybe acting with less urgency than truman and the other founders? >> you are right, we don't have any leaders that remember world war ii. some of them don't remember the cold war, that is how young it

is going. my first experience in the labor market was at the council many years ago, david atchison was still around, linked to those early days of nato. but, yes, how do you manage and give purpose to an alliance when you don't know what you are trying to prevent. you can conceptualize it. and that is a good problem to have, to the credit of nato, preventing the things other leaders had experienced. i think, but we do have with nato, completely underestimated people who have seen the bad things people can do to one another, and helped -- that is the soldiers who served within our armed forces.

men and women of many ages, including very young, who do the hard work of nato on a daily basis. allied countries, other countries, including some experiencing on conflicts. for hundreds of thousands of people within our country's, across america, and a number of other nationstates, other nato member states, on the ground have experienced serving as part of nato, representing nato. phenomenal ambassadors for this alliance. i was talking to somebody who had served somewhere, i can't

remember where,the dog that had served with him, referred to him as a nato dog. they are proud of serving in the alliance. we have this incredible group of people who are not policymakers but represent nato. on the basis of what they have done. >> wonderful the atlantic council was founded in 1961 to support the transatlantic relationship nato. atchison -- we don't yet have a nato dog. maybe we should get one. let's go to you, always strong, bipartisan support for nato in

united states, has nato benefited the average american, does it benefit the average american today? make the case. >> it does. four big reasons how it does, before i explained it, these views are my own though i am in it government employee. the bedrock, the values that we all share. a community of democracies, for the most part, some countries have had mixed relationships, portugal, a founding member, could not be called a democracy until the early 1970s. some have moved farther away from the ideals. generally, the community shares our values and that is important for the second reason, at a strategic level, competing with our adversaries. and defending our interests. we talk about strategic competition with china or russia, the allies that we have

are our comparative advantage. russians, chinese they don't have the same allies we do across the globe, anchors in europe and the trend atlantic. that brings me to the third reason it is a good value for americans today, material, we cannot do what we do in the world without having allies by our side. i am thinking about the burden they share with the surge in afghanistan, they provided one third of the trucks, but the alliance per se was not involved in iraq in an operational way, allies in europe contributed about one third. more recently, outside the military realm, we could not have pulled iran to the negotiating table over his nuclear capabilities without it.

unfolding in ukraine, burden sharing good news story. european allies are outpacing the americans with military, financial, and humanitarian services. the fourth and most important reason why nato and our european allies help americans, economics. ironic because economics is barely mentioned in the nato treaty we're celebrating this week. however, if we look back at the history of why it was founded, really founded as a way of consolidating security and stability in europe and allowing europe to rise from the ashes of world war ii. that economic relationship was vital today, as it was back then. today, the trade investment relationship between our countries in europe is about $1.5 trillion.

that is twice the trade and investment relationship we have with china. if you look at jobs, 5 million american jobs are directly tied to european companies operating in our country. in contrast, chinese firms support about 160,000 jobs. from my perspective, we know that capital -- stability in europe is vital, their economy and hours, we are the most important reason for why this relationship of the alliance matters. >> thank you, john. you provoked responses and other panelists want to jump in. paula? >> i was inspired by your response. my opening only addressed certain points but other points to be addressed, one of which, you emphasized the importance

of the lottery, the alliance -- camaraderie, it reminded me of 9/11, article five vote, an attack on one is an attack on all, this is so consequential because the first and only time article five has never been invoked. it just speaks to the strength of that importance of the alliance. other countries were repaired to step forward and to think about what the ramifications. the other thing you made me think of, in terms of a change from the beginning to the present, just the change of warfare. that was built in to your question because, thinking about cyber, thinking about all

the new technological dimensions, how also there is an advantage, economically, militarily, to collaborating together in the context of the alliance. those are the two points i wanted to mention. you reminded me of article five and the fact that other countries in the alliance immediately invoked article five on behalf of the united states, an attack on us on 9/11. >> thank you, important point, 9/11 being the only time article five was invoked. elizabeth asked to -- elizabeth? >> i am not trying to be pollyanna-ish about this, we have problems but, one aspect i don't think gets enough credit or any credit at all, the fact that it gives u.s. and the

members an opportunity to serve in different countries and get experience, not just working, but experience, university students, they have to pay big money to get. the other day, american soldiers had been visiting somewhere, something ordinarily you only get if you go a semester abroad. that is expensive. in the u.s. military, if you are selected, you can go to one of the nato member states where the military has a presence and you experience the country, which is why the u.s. military is one of the reasons why the u.s. military has more exposure, more cultural understanding of other countries that almost any other part of the world. incredible value for money. >> a simple burden sharing fact, whatever nato undertakes

a military operation, in support of u.s. interests, every european soldier that participates in that mission basically accounts for three u.s. soldiers that don't have to participate. for every soldier, one is resting up and training for the mission. in 2011, when there were 40,000 europeans, non-american troops serving under -- 120,000 americans who did not have to serve in combat that is very effective burden sharing. a real asset for the united states that nato provides. >> wonderful. this has been a great look back and we can go back to the history but i also want to look forward and we have that nato summit coming up this summer, historic summit 75th anniversary that will be held in washington, d.c. and the atlantic council is honored to be selected by nato as one of the official partners for putting on the public forum. we are looking forward to that.

likely to be several major themes at the summit, deterrence and defense, future of ukraine, burden sharing, the nato role in the indo pacific, let's look at some of the major challenges for the summit and look ahead to the alliance. paula, any of these topics, ukraine is of interest, the indo pacific as well. >> i will take on these two and we will pass it down the line. the summit, one of the key questions will be, ukraine and the membership in nato. it is crucial that the summit demonstrates that, not only membership to ukraine should be extended, definitively, clearly , but, secondly, not only about the extension of this, but the

beginning of the process. the atlantic council sponsored a letter which was nonpartisan, you have republicans, democrats , independents, who came together and basically wrote in the letter how this summit provides the opportunity to formally and actively begin the process. i was one of the signatories, there were many others who were signatories, but specifically, i think the summit has to highlight that issue in a way which is not going back to bucharest, moving from bucharest, and moving on -- i think that the signal it sends is imperative, a critical one, you mentioned deterrence, that is crucial in terms of sending a signal about deterrence relative to ukraine and its fight for its own sovereignty,

is virtual independence, and freedom from russian aggression. definitely, i think there has to be clarity, u.s. leadership on this, in a way in which we move forward very directly. i know there will be challenges to this, of course, not all the countries are embracing this approach, but between now and then, we have to work on aggressively, and think about how to send a clear signal forward that that process is on its way actively. with regard to the in the pacific, one of the core questions, what kind of arrangement nato should have in the indo pacific? i am glad jens stoltenberg and nato itself have been actively pursuing this, there is a debate in the discussion about

what form and shape it should take. i think that it is appropriate to look for some kind of permanent presence in the indo pacific region, the manifestation, a facility, a mission, and no less in terms of our own military assets. which can also take different shapes and forms. again, the first born again -- about deterrence, a core responsibility of nato and in that regard both of these issues are key, which will be spotlighted when the united states posts the summit. >> good point about the role in the indo pacific. you have written on what nato should be doing in the indo pacific, ian, and have thoughts on these other topics.

>> the defining issue for the summit, the defining issue when it comes to the future of nato. i believe, the future of nato is in the outcome of this defense against the russian invasion. this will be found in ukraine. this will be the defining contextual driver of the summit. if we have a summit in the context on a ukraine that is in a stalemate or losing territory regardless of the path of membership or not, not a winning track, a summit that will damage the credibility of nato. how is it an alliance with the gdp of $55 trillion and the defense budget of $1.3 trillion

, not to mention the best fighting forces in the world, cannot defeat an adversary with 1/25 of its gdp, the defense budget 1/10 that of all of nato. we have seen, the fighting forces are no match tothat of nato. what does it say about nato if it continues the summit and ukraine is not winning this war decisively? if we will have a successful summit, inspire confidence in the alliance and continue its ability to deter aggression, the summit has to put ukraine onto a path to victory. that will require five things, the alliance to adopt war objectives, territorial reconstitution, anything short of that -- this community notes,

you have to give ukraine the weapons they need now, the capability they need, and without restrictions. on how they are used against legitimate russian military targets in russia. third, engage in ukraine, with the russian people, we have to tell them what is going on in ukraine, how it is affecting them, the atrocities they are committing, we are not doing that like in the cold war. we have to have economic sanctions that are serious the russian economy grew by 3% last year shows we are being inadequate about the strategy in our political will. i agree with paula, the strategy for ukraine has to include a clear pathway into nato membership, not just after the war, which we don't know what will happen, but part of the strategy, article 5 is the only thing that we understand,

-- make the war in ukraine will be a major issue in the summit, burden sharing, taking on more salience recently. what do you make of these american problems what dcs burden sharing and

>> people wanted to be lots of things that it did not intend to be. on this day when they sat down to defend the territory that was it. there was nothing about hybrid warfare and nothing about the indo-pacific any of that. understandably, people looking -- a successful alliance, wanted to be more and do more. that's also i think a deterrence. many more things than it was originally set out to do. this is where the burden sharing actually looks quite a bit better.

defense spending and a number of european countries had excellent solutions when it came to resilience. resilience is one positive deterrence. the u.s. is not good with resilience may be counter. the advantage of having all these different allies in nato as you have a group of countries right there from home you can learn who have models that may work and if they do not work 100%, you can adapt them. that's the other great thing is it's not just the immediate function of nato. the fact you have friends who can help you. for example, as we speak. sweden is introducing a national grid, type of national service. might it be a solution but other nato members who would be and even the united states. then you have a country willing to tell you how it works and

how they set it up and give you the blueprint for how to do it. >> wonderful. john, i'd like to ask you about deterrence and defense. esther at the nato summit, nato agreed to regional plans. have been described as maybe the first serious defense plans for nato since the end of the cold war. does nato have the right strategy for deterrence and defense? does it have the structure it needs? tell us where nato stands of these issues. >> there's been a real revolution. speaking of burden sharing, 2014, russia's first impression of ukraine, the alliance begin to turn around the defense spending first and foremost. we've seen an uptick since 2015. that effort has been on steroids since 2022 and russia's second invasion of ukraine. the alliances got more serious about its approach to russia issuing a new strategic concept in 2022 that identified russia's the primary threat. very different than an contrast

to 2010 in its last strategy. if we take a step down at the operational level, here's where we see the lines begin to engage in a more deliberate process of thinking about how it would response to russian aggression and allied territories. we saw last year the alliance approved a new set of operation planned designed specifically to counter russian aggression in different parts of europe. we are seeing unfold this year the development of more technical regional specific plan , main specific plan, that will further flesh out what nato needs where and how quickly. the challenge the alliance has is resourcing all of that. as i mentioned, the first part is increased defense spending. that's going in the right direction. i have concerns is not occurring quickly enough and at the degree that's big enough in the big players. within europe, the uk, france, and italy.

those countries together account for two thirds of european nato defense spending and though there defense spending has been trending upwards as i mentioned, it's not going up at a pace that's high enough or fast enough. if those four are not pulling their weight at a significant level, it's difficult for nato to meet the capability and capacity requirements to make good on these new plans. there is some risk there. i think the alliance will try to address this at the summit. we should expect to see deliverables in this area of defense and deterrence. i am hopeful this may be one of them. >> wonderful. >> go ahead. >> i was going to say, to you, i wanted to underscore the point about the upcoming summit and the fact it is a pivotal in defining moment. this whole question about ukraine and it will send a clear signal. i think you well articulated

and i agree with all the points you made in terms of consequences if the summit does not have clarity on this issue. really take a clear and bold stance. secondly, i wanted to comment briefly, elizabeth, the interested thinker i think the atlantic council i think is hosting this week or next, actually a session that will focus on the contributions of europe. i was struck by that, particularly relative to ukraine. i think that's important because it is true as you said, there's so many countries that have stepped forward and actually in certain spheres doing much greater and faster steps than the united states. fighter aircraft is one of them that a number of countries have moved forward significantly in europe and we are still have not taken the kind of step that should be shaken relative to ukraine. i just want to mention i'm

struck by statements made by lithuanian officials. a number of lithuanian officials said the following. why does not the west stop setting up redlines for itself? putin does not have redlines. why is it we are putting redlines for ourselves? i think that's is an important statement to remember. >> why are we putting redlines? >> we are putting redlines for ourselves because senior officials in nato and in washington, d.c. fear the risk of escalation. this gets to the issue of not only capability but political will and resoluteness. the alliance was successful during the cold war not only because it was able to generate capable military forces and to deploy them and to resource them, it was also able to be successful because it demonstrated a determination, willingness to go to battle and

in defense of alliance territory and failures. nowhere was this more clear than west berlin. enclave in east germany. it was never attacked because soviets knew if it did get attacked there would be a forceful response. military response. unambiguous response from the alliance. as we go into the nato summit today, we will highlight a lot of progress that john laid out. increased defense spending, updated strategic concept, regional plans that are more effectively leveraged the alliance capabilities. enhanced unity within the alliance. but, is the alliance going to demonstrate that they have the will to fight? the resoluteness that made it so successful during the cold war? that answer will be provided by what it does and does not do on ukraine and that's why i'm a little worried. >> it looks like elisabeth and

john want to come in on this question of resoluteness then we will go to the other participants. elisabeth. >> it is paradoxical i think that considering how much the u.s. -- for phaedo and still does for nato. that policymakers can't resist the urge to say something that undermines it and they have deliberately $1 million for what the u.s. does for collective defense. i know it's the nature of a liberal democracy. a vibrant debate but sometimes we think twice about saying something because it may be perceived in a certain way and countries that wish us ill and countries that are america's allies and it's so harmful. think twice before you say something. i want to remind you as policymakers that good advice

every time and every classroom everywhere. >> john, is that good advice to nato policymakers? >> it may be but i wanted to comment on the question of redlines advised we post them. i think ian got it right. we are concerned with escalation. russia has the largest nuclear in the world. we have to pay attention to that and think about the consequences of the actions. i think there's another reason why. to signal to our public here in the u.s. and also allied public that we will limit our engagement and why is that? i think it's hangover of the last two decades where we have seen ourselves overextended. the westing conflict in iraq and afghanistan. the cost of those conflicts are between four and $8 trillion. that doesn't begin to scratch the surface on american lives and iraqis, afghans and allies.

it's a concerted effort to signal to our public still have this hangover of these complex two decades ago that we will not be engaging in the conflict, at least not yet. circumstances could dictate otherwise but i think that's part of the intent of these redlines. >> quick comment? >> i want to add one looked back since were moving on from the retrospective which is a two has been extraordinarily agile if you think the way it -- how many collective organizations do not they have been able to adapt to circumstances over 7.5 decades. non-. circumstances, when i was walking over here this morning i walked past a shop window where there used to be a -- that was a thing 20, 30 years ago when you want to make photocopies. kinko's didn't know how to adapt and now there is none

anymore or anywhere is. nato has been incredibly agile despite being around in its clunky way. so credit to the leaders who made it happen both nato staff and national leaders. >> it is a good point. at the end of the cold war, you nato outlived its purpose and it will come to an end and instead it expanded and became stronger. i have more questions but we have good questions coming in from the online audience and we have an in-person audience. i would like to turn to you for your questions for in-person. if you would like to ask a question,, to the microphone over here. that way, everybody can hear you. online participants as well. if you could identify your name and affiliation, that would be terrific. let's go to our first in-person question. >> can you hear me? good afternoon.

george mason university. my question is about the political approach of nato. the fact it's the only defender of democracy in the world and maybe we don't engage fully with the people including russia. how to improve the communication of nato to explain it's a political the terry alliance. >> who would like to take that? >> during the cold war, we had a mass organization that served as the strategic communication are. paulo was a senior -- information agency. we mistakenly shut it down in 1998. absorb is a generous word. if you look at the state department today, the center is what manages a. in the center has $60 million budget? u.s. iaa when a closed head

over $3 billion. it had a go infrastructure. it had a to update -- director under secretaries, deputy secretary's. you had a career in strategic communications at u.s. iaa. when he kept ourselves by shutting it down. right now we are not engaging the russian people in any way clothes the way we did during the cold war supporting getting the truth out and weaponize in the truth in a positive way. we are intimidated because we feel that if we get into that game again, it will be perceived by putin is a direct attack on his regime and create a risk of escalation. it's a profound mistake that is weakening our ability to change the course of the war in ukraine and to change russia into a more constructive path. maybe when the could be more oriented toward democracy and a constructive role in international affairs. >> i will add to that.

your question is a very relevant one. it is one that is crucial because it's not only about the military component, and it's well stated about the economic dimension of it as john well articulated. but it is about the political glue that makes it stick and run. in that sense, i think there was a period where we were a bit complacent in terms of in the earlier period of our alliance. we took a number of things for granted. ian is right, and you are right in saying there has to be great activism because these are the values that really bind does. bind us together. i will mention on the positive side, and i do agree with everything you have said, ian, but i do think the fact that nato , nine nato member status. i am amazed there are so many

countries across the globe on every continent that fits into that category. why? because of the values. they are drawn into the values and also the actual underpinning of what the alliance really means. >> great. elisabeth. >> one of nato's challenges is there are many people who like it very much and like to spend a career in the nato sphere either inside the organizations are and think tanks are national governments. they become the face of nato. they do not realize it differently nato looks to people on the outside and if you are part of the choir of the converted, you love it. i think what it would be useful for nato is to invite representatives on a regular basis, representatives from

environmental activist. they comment they do not like nato. if they were to find out what nato is about they may see it in a different light. those people, i am not saying -- i don't know whether that would convince pressure that nato is not the belligerent organization that russia likes to portray but it would help nato acquire a somewhat different profile and hopefully a more positive one in the view of the many who are not part of the sword to nato groupie network. >> we have many good questions online. maybe a first one for you because you were talking about the difficulties of resourcing our strategy. in the lead up to the washington summit, analysts have discussed the idea of a new defense spending target. 2% was set at wales 10 years ago at the summit last year. i think the phrase was 2% is a

floor and not a ceiling. can you discuss why allies would shift to a new target when minneapolis failed to meet the current one? what else can the alliance be doing to ensure its able to resource the new defense plans and ensure the alliance is equipped with the tools it needs to be successful on battlefields of the future? >> this is a great question considering the challenge the alliance faces. the 2% goal precedes wales. that summit in 2014 was the first instance in which the heads of state and government committed to the pledge. it was previously made by defense ministers who would go back and try to do good at whether finance ministers or their treasuries to get the money they had committed to. now that we have this commitment of 2% of gdp which that's a very crude measurement of burden sharing. nato tracks a dozen other measures, only one or two are made public. i think the alliance could do a better job and maybe sharing some of this information

regarding what we really see in terms of burden sharing and at the just the inputs but the outputs the alliance hits for its money. as we look to what's about to unfold this year, you mentioned that we sought to percent described as a floor last year. in fact, a careful reading of the wales summit language would show 2% was revealed as a floor. i don't think what happened last year was very new added much. i've been in advocate of something along the lines of 2.4 in 24 but i think the alliance is not going to commit to any new defense spending target. the reason for that is it would show disunity. there's not a consensus on this about committing to a new percentage of gdp for defense spending. let's remember the job of every summit, especially in washington , is to depict unity as much as we can.

disagreement about where it should be, that would not be productive. how can the alliance get beyond this challenge? we have seen suggestions floated, the allies could perhaps issue at least in europe, issue bonds. the eu is talking about doing this for defense spending. that may be a solution but i think that's the deeper challenge. that's mainly the defense budgets of individual alliance members. going into debt is one way to solve the problem but it's not an effective way. there needs to be a stronger re- examination of our european allies. this touches on the last question about messaging. nato i think can do more to message what the threats are that confront the allies, how they are manifesting themselves today in our countries, especially in europe. the threat posed by china today and europe. if we can get citizens to realize the nature

of the challenge we face as we have seen in 2014, defense spending will rise. it's getting the message to citizens and having politicians ideally have the courage to act on it. >> you know on messaging, i happened two weeks ago to be in nato headquarters with a group that was there and received by the public affairs division. they have an outstanding public affairs division meaning in terms of what they articulate and how they put it together but i don't know how they get out and around rather than people coming into nato, and that was your point also. >> we are trying to do our part with this event covered by c- span to get the message out. doing what we can and we will turn to the next in-person question. if you could tell us your name and affiliation. >> alliance in washington, d.c. my question will be quick. you spoke about need to put

ukraine on a path to victory. what is victory for ukraine? >> ukraine is defined by president and parliament and supported by the vast majority. re-territorial constitution, 1991 borders. >> thank you very much. >> at the atlantic council we interviewed an assistant secretary of defense in the biden administration and we asked this question and she said that ukraine's goal and we support ukraine in their goal. >> the problem is you can look at alliance communiquis and a calls for the removal of russian troops from ukrainian territory. the administration and nato allies don't always use such clear terms. they talk about independent sovereign and do not mention territory inferring either intentionally or unintentionally that there could be a compromise that would be acceptable to the west and i think that's a wrong

message. we should be clearer. i hope her colleagues in the u.s. government and across nato will be just as clear. >> the questioner, your question was so relevant because others try to answer it when ukraine has already answered it very clearly. and has been very consistent on the. >> we are running short on time and i think what i think is a great question data -- >> it seems it's focused on ukraine unless on moldova and bosnia. we come back in 75 years, who were the new nato members who will be admitted? >> i think the doors should be

open to those who want to become part. georgia in particular the countries mentioned has been very actively pursuing nato membership. i think those that want to be part of the alliance and also are willing to be part of the requirements of the alliance should be able to come in and do so. >> with just a few minutes, maybe we should make this a closing round. nato enlargement or other issues , we come back 75 years, what are the issues the alliance will have to tackle between now and then? >> looking forward, ensuring ukraine winds. that's the most urgent task. second is with the ukrainian victory and extension and nato membership to ukraine as part of the strategy. nato demonstrates it is willingly accepting the applications of other europeans

the georgians, moldovans and others in the western balkans to complete the vision of a european. i would say establishing a footprint in the indo-pacific so we can be part of a security strategy to deal with the challenges and opportunities. strategy that has a diplomatic, economic, political dimension into military dimension. they serve that role for the transatlantic community and that dimension. those are the key challenges before the alliance over the next 75 years. >> elisabeth? >> it's going to be climate change. not just related to how much co2 they emit. climate change will cause enormous problems, national security problems of all kinds including armed conflict between countries relating to

resources but also even more urgent for europe growth in population movements as home countries become uninhabitable. that's a severe national security challenge for every european country. there is no clear answer what to do about this. nato is a defense alliance, national security alliance involving european countries. something comes in their way regardless of whether or not one thinks we do end up to combat climate change, nato will have to confront whatever the results are of this looming problem we don't have an answer to. >> i think the greatest challenge is the realization, it's been slow in coming, that the challenge we face from russia is not an acute one but a persistent one. our allies in the east, the balkan states, poland, finland,

they get this but it's slow for americans to grasp this and we have the notion that we can part the russian threat and turn to the indo-pacific and let europeans handle things. that is unrealistic. there's incredible relationships between these two theaters and we cannot ignore there. recognizing a can no longer be a buffer zone between the west and russia and managing the friction that's inevitable is the greatest challenge they will face. >> great power, competition. in that sense, the alliance is absolutely key and pivotal in this geopolitical challenge confronting western values and what we represent. >> it's been a fascinating conversation. i have more questions but we have come to the end of our time. i want to thank our distinguished panelists for sharing your expertise today.

the atlantic council will continue in our mission of shaping the global future together and nowhere is it more important than conversations like today's. it's been a pleasure to moderate. i encourage all of you to stay engaged with the atlantic council and the security initiative. especially as we accelerate the campaign toward the 2024 nato summit. do not go anywhere. we have another panel coming up in the next panel where thrilled to feature group of next generation experts and leaders across the alliance who will take part in a panel discussion. nato 75 and looking at the next 75 years. the panel begin a 50 minutes and moderated by alexandra sharp. thank you for joining us and stay tuned for the next panel. >> [ applause ]

members of the house rules to committee to hold merrick garland in contempt of congress after he turned down a request from house republicans to release audio recordings of president biden's interview with special counsel robert hur on his handling of classified documents. the rules committee will work on legislation dealing with defense programs and policy. watch live at 12:00 p.m. eastern on c-span 3. cspan now, mobile app, or online .

journalism professors and other stakeholders. this discussion host about the lbj foundation and the nonprofit are perfect in austin, texas, they talk about the skills needed, diversity of viewpoints, the role journals play in implementing local policy and early investment in talent. >> ladies and gentlemen, please welcome.