nation's deputy secretary general will she now acknowledge that nato has serious blips in its unity. rose got a mother welcome to conflicts and we thank you great to be here your bar c.n.n. stoltenberg reminded the world recently that nato has mission was to provide credible to terence and defense the fact is that deterrence is no longer credible and hasn't been for a long time has so why do you say that we've said we're not in the midst of war when we say that because just 5 months ago america's national defense strategy commission painted a pretty dismal picture of the us is ability to protect both itself and its allies the security and well being of the us it said are a greater risk today that at any time in decades america's superiority has a row digit to a dangerous degree in its ability to defend its allies its partners and its own

vital interests is increasingly in doubt that's that's dismal isn't it there are many different fields of how deterrence and defense are conducted today and i think for nato the emphasis truly has to be on what we now call the hybrid challenges that are coming out us many of them associated with emergence of new technologies and accelerated by new technology let's look at defense commission factor those in to its report and then i think that the u.s. military could suffer and acceptably high casualties and the loss of major capital assets in its next conflict it might struggle to win a war against russia or china that's got that's not good news is it well what i have to tell you if you ask me the question about whether deterrence is working or not i have to say yes because we do in fact here at nato will work together as 29 nations with the united states to provide for the deterrence and defense of all 29 allies and we do have challenges i don't. on the sugar coat the challenges that we

face and particularly the challenges emanating from new technology but i'm not ready to cry that we're in the midst of disaster the section pointed out that for the 1st time nato has combat ready battle groups in the eastern part of the alliance for battle groups in the baltic states and poland plus a dish new forces amounting to a brigade the authority of the rand corporation doesn't think much of it says nato forces are not nearly sufficient to defend a contiguous line and to lay out a large scale conventional advance by a mechanized adversary such as russia again hardly a vote of confidence in the measures that lead to is taken as the for battle groups in the baltic states and in poland are not meant to hold the line for long they are precisely that they are going to be credible they are and they are credible as a deterrence and defense tripwire because they bring together forces from across the alliance units from every single nato ally practically are serving in those

battle groups and server but you animal russian knows russian knows that if they step across the line they will face the entire nato alliance but that is why nowadays we are placing our emphasis on reinforcement and readiness and being able to rapidly move troops in behind those battleground isn't impressed by that either it says that given the current posture and capability including the european battalions and rotational u.s. armored brigade combat team russia still enjoys a substantial time distance advantage in the initial days and weeks of a conventional ground campaign in the baltic states that's the reality of geo geography and the fact that russia does in fact sit as the great land power in eurasia that's a fact of history yeah but i do forces are not providing the parents that you promised i don't know why you keep saying that you're sorry i'm not sorry yes we're going to live sorting some reports that have come out at. i'm terribly amused by

those rand reports you know i work for random the 1980 s. they said exactly the same thing during the cold war so the fact of the matter is everybody gave up there's just no no they don't make it up but they are repeating you know what is based on a reality of the geopolitics and the geography of eurasia what we can do is ensure that russia knows all 29 allies are prepared to act and are prepared to reinforce and that has proven during the cold war an effective deterrent and i believe it proves an effective deterrent today the impression of an alliance that is no longer credible has been assisted if you like by years of war games played out on computers by the pen to good range of defense experts nato consistently loses against what it considers to be its main adversary doesn't it well i think the best thing you can say about exercise of all kinds is that they are meant to stress test stress test until we understand where our weaknesses lie and what we have to do

better i was present this fall when we had our big trident juncture exercise which was not a computer exercise it was a big combined arms exercise in norway and it showed that it had been a long time since the alliance had reinforced across the north atlantic there were problems that emerged in the course of your eye off the ball well we saw the end of the soviet union and everyone decided and it was a good thing the last tank of the united states left europe in 2013 we saw that as a good thing but then after 2014 and the aggression against crimea the seizure of crimea the destabilization of the donbass we had to think again about deterrence and defense that must be the agency must in there because last month give you an example a senior research at the center for a new american security david out monica you probably know i know he said of the graphically that when the simulations were run against russia and china america gets by. side gets its backside handed to it to put it slightly differently i've

just adjusted it we usually fail he added to achieve our objective of preventing aggression by the adversary do you think moscow hasn't noticed that as well well i do think it's important as i said to train and exercise without taking our eye off the ball and when we learn that we have problems then we have to rectify them and that means a lot of hard work but we're in the midst of it it's extraordinary that you do have these problems because the staggering amount by which nato countries outspend russia on defense and still lose the war games it's surprising isn't it really when you think that the alliances combines economic strength into only 16 was about 31 times that of russians. what are you doing with the money if you are not getting value for money you know you i'm asking the question as to whether the problems you describe are actually the problems that you have i'd be very interested to see how

the russian general staff trains in exercises i'm sure they also train to stress themselves until they fail and then they have to work on their problems so i think we have to consider what the challenges on both sides are and in the case of nato and its allies the united states and its allies i see capable forces that are adjusting to the modern warfare and are moving rather i would say flexible a and with speed to do so i'm not always sure i see that in the russian armed forces. despite a nato advantage of more than 3 quarters of a trillion dollars spent by the alliance's combined military forces in a single year i'm talking about 2015 you would struggle to win a conflict with russia how is that possible when you outspend them to this enormous degree well again i'm not accepting the basis of your hypothesis i'm not sure that we would actually lose because again we have

a great deal of flexibility and adaptability that's why nato has succeeded all these years we have been able to adapt to new challenges when they come out us you think is succeeding with in 2008 the russians took a bite out of georgia after a lightning strike i know wasn't a nato member bowser nato partner in 2014 in crimea you mentioned a move to seize that since 2014 russian forces either regular or contract troops have been operating with pretty near impunity in eastern ukraine 10000 people have died so there's a claim that it's being keeping the peace isn't quite true is it i think it is important to point out that article 5 of the washington treaty applies to allies that's the famous all for one and one for all. part of the washington treaty that is the core of our defense alliance where george's concern in 2008 that was an enormous wake up call and 2014 represented

a sea change for the alliance not even see it coming not only in terms of a wake up call in ukraine but also the fact that the rise of eisel the establishment of the caliphate in mosul that brought the fight against terrorism and violent extremism into sharper focus as well so we did have a wake up call in that period and i think it has led to huge change in the alliance not least of which was a huge change in our defense spending and a look at why. we really need today to counter both of these kinds of challenges but despite the fact that you provide ukraine with what stoltenberg called strong political and practical support it makes no difference to what russia's moves in the military field in the area has it it's strengthened its naval forces it's built up its tanks according to the chief of staff ukraine general staff last year they

built up tanks along the border they're not being deterred by your strong support political or otherwise for ukraine other i think they've taken notice we have put quite a bit into training but i want to give credit to the ukrainian armed forces themselves they have been doing a lot to professionalize and develop their capability and capacity over the last 6 years that has really been impressive and so they working together with us and also with individual nato allies have been making a difference to hold the line but you continue to dangle nato membership is a carrot in front of them without giving them a timetable for it without a timetable it's meaningless as. well let's have a moment to talk about that in 2008 at the bucharest summit 4 countries spoke about their aspirations and nato agreed that they would be in the line to have nato

membership those countries included ukraine and georgia but we have been very clear that both of those countries are still on the path of reform we have to ensure that when countries are ready to enter nato store they are ready to contribute to security and defense in the alliance but also to come up to certain standards of democratic principle so what are you waiting for to moscow's take another bite out of eastern ukraine know what we're waiting for is to see them come up to a certain level of readiness for nato membership. nato allies have reiterated that decision we made some years ago that ukraine will become a member of nato that's the bucharest summit the 2nd that still stands some point at some time it's up to ukraine to decide who their security relationships will be with that's an important principle from our perspective i have to say though it's also very important that all nato allies be ready to accept them and

that means seeing a level of of reform and development in their not only armed forces but also in their democratic practice let's talk about nato 70th birthday which is just coming on the happiest one downgraded to foreign minister level instead of the usual heads of government. you disagree on many issues you know secretary general hardly ideal in an alliance that claims that strength rests on unity is that the secretary general had a wonderful speech before a joint session of congress the 1st time any leader of an international organization has had that honor it was a great day but we haven't finished with our celebrations tim there will be a leaders' meeting at the end of the year in london in december heads of state and government will celebrate nato 70th anniversary let me put it bluntly the problem is that many member states don't trust donald trump do this and his commitment to

nato why should there i mean he's done everything he could to undermine trust that he's 100 percent behind it you know i haven't seen that clearly donald trump has shaken things up there's no question about it he's gotten off a bit more than that it's got molly allies to sit up and take notice because he was very concerned about the lack of of fair burden sharing inside the alliance and he wanted allies to pay more in his inimitable way he got everybody to pay attention to the necessity of putting more money into their defense budgets that's $1.00 thing that will come out will come into funding in a minute but i want to just say that 10 days ago it fell to william burns former state department advisor to 5 u.s. presidents and one of the most respected u.s. diplomats over the last 30 years to point out that terms unilateralism is doing putin's work for him by widening the gap between the u.s. and europe over climate change iran backs it and nato that's a serious charge from

a serious highly placed person of a liberal is indeed very serious but what's your question why don't you take that seriously you're telling me everything's fine you tell you everything's 5 but i say elephant in every room listen to he's the one they talk about he keeps casting doubt. tical 5 nato whether it's obsolete or not you've heard the statements and you've read the report courts well look in this headquarters we have important work to do every single day that's why trust is so important exactly trust is broken and that we're in trouble and we are in trouble we are working hard to do what we need to do in terms of running our operations in afghanistan and iraq in terms of continuing to run our operations in k. 4 in the western balkans in terms of providing for both deterrence and defense and fighting against terrorism in the saliva so every day we keep our heads down and

keep working yes of course there are differences among nato allies and as i've said mr trump has gotten everybody to sit up and take notice but this is more the true this is the more just this is more than just differences that loot former u.s. ambassador to nato said earlier this month this is unprecedented we're at the 70th anniversary but it's the 1st time allies have doubted the commitment of the american president nato allies he said see trump as the alliance's most urgent and often most difficult problem well again highly placed influential well informed indeed indeed doug lute does as well but i don't need to agree with all my friends and colleagues on the outside what i see as how nato is working day in day out to make a difference to our deterrence and defense and that includes fighting terrorism you seem to live in a parallel universe you know i don't know or i don't how do you say parallelled ludicrous house of representatives they had so little confidence in chumps

intentions toward nato that last year they had to pass a law with bipartisan support stating that is u.s. policy to remain a member of nato prohibiting funds to be used to withdraw from the alliance so little confidence do they have in their president's commitment to nato her a i saw that as a great expression in washington of bipartisan support. art for nato and i saw it when we were there 10 days ago for the 70th anniversary nato is well supported across both sides of the aisle that's a great thing why why are you going off isaac and not by the president well i don't know about that because you know actions speak louder than words since the president has come into office the united states is spending $40000000000.00 more on the european reassurance initiative putting more cut capability.