the sometimes a seed is all you need to allow the big ideas to grow. we're bringing an environmental conservation to life with learning facts like global ideas. we will show you how climate change and environmental conservation is taking shape around the world and how we can make a difference. knowledge grows through sharing, download it now for the day. so somebody didn't build is, was towed as a some of those products and it's showing unity springs. how united is the alliance? really, that mean doubts about that lately. natal wants to be prepared to count of the new made enemy, russia. well, money, most soldiers and more weapons. hans also wants to continue growing suite without

joining ukraine. well, perhaps one day that was disappointing for the landscape, but at least he will receive little hardware, including controversial weapons side cluster munitions. this is meant to ensure that you, cranium, comfortable, offensive, will succeed. we are nights around the wor, no security for you cry. the gulf is welcome to to the point, let me introduce today's panel, so that will direct off the billing office of the german marshall fund. i found a couple if director of the economy of russia, eurasia centers, i think time on marcus co chair of defense economics optima military the academy at

e t h. so i will welcome to all of you. let me start with you so that, that somebody that just finished in a value estimate to the summit, was it a success? and if so for whom i think the summit can be categorized as a success for a number of reasons. one, there was unity among the 31 member states in terms of having ukraine eventually joined. as a member, there was a realization that 2 percent should be a floor rather than a ceiling. all the members understand that investment nato is necessary. there was also the plans, it was acknowledged that defense plans for europe and for defending the continent were in place. so for all those reasons, i think you can call the nato summit, this success, especially if you see it as more of an interim step or a bridge to the next summit. and washington, when they know, celebrates

a milestone anniversary. not so much as successful for villas, people to agree on necessarily. i think a great success is that the membership action plan was waste because that's if implemented what, what suddenly mean a number of, of years on top of what we already have. and they just explained, as this is a simplified, the most speedy access to data is exactly the same. what, what nato did was finland's and sweden's attempts to, to join waiving the the membership action fun. i mean, there are examples in, in, in nato members a take, for example, croatia, all daniel of northern macedonia, where that accession period took years or even decades. and the, the simple fact that it will be waived for ukraine. and that means probably that ukraine will be ready to join nato as soon as military is on western standards. and as soon as the sudden institutional reforms haven't passed them so close as soon as

the war is over. but once that happens, um, they're all know, most of the futures and no more arguments why ukraine shooting off drawing nato. and i think that is a great success for the credit is on a zillow. how is this being viewed in, in russia, you think? i think that the fact that you created will not be admitted to nato. this time was quite expected. president button was very clear. caught, is that a successful months ago? i think that's something that's already baked in in the criminal is expectations that, well, ukraine will not enter nato just now because president biden said that he's not bringing the us in nato to work with russia or you crane. but the fact that ukraine has received commitments for, for a long investment in its defense capacity, including building up the credit and military industry and provision of weapons, long term. i think that's something that for is the problem. and, but the problem in hopes that this will be repeating statements and piece of paper

. and then if donald trump is in the white house, if there was a different leadership in major european countries, probably this promises will be for t o. and we will go way so at that it has been touted that the fact that the us and germany, especially the us, have been standing on the brakes with regards to problem membership, nature membership for ukraine. uh, the reason for that being that they still want the us still wants nature membership as a bargaining chip with russia offices. why do you agree? we have 0 evidence to support this, and i think that jake solomon's the national security advisor was on the record saying that that's not the case. that yes, there are channels of communication to the russians about risking and about millage preventing military incidents going out of hand. but it's not, not about discussing ukraine's future without ukraine. and again,

i think that this is ground list really, and i also would say that there is no reason to believe that russia will have a say and ukraine's future to me, the, the only realistic goal in this war is the restitution of ukraine and it's photos and it's 1991 for this, that includes crimea. and i think it was a great 4th of european policy to be too much influenced by the so called red lines or the so called russian security interest. there are no such a interest. we have to weld order of $90.45, and that means we have southern states against which no regression is tolerated. and the sooner we return to that world or the better for that was as such. starting back down, play this membership issue and said it, the main thing was more weapons for ukraine. that's the top priority as the would you agree? is that is a reasonable does that mean? absolutely. i think, you know, present soleski should be happy that not only short term security guarantees were

issued, but also long term. and talk of sort of having b is really model apply to ukraine is also very beneficial. look at the relationship is really mobile. me is a special security meeting that like, you know, the sovereignty and security of israel should be upheld. now certainly, it's not a perfect analogy, since israel is known to have nuclear weapons. but none the less united states is a strong supporter, an ally of israel. and if, if the president biden equates ukraine with israel back could only be a good thing. and i don't think presidents once you necessarily expected automatic membership in tomato at the summit when he was looking for was perhaps stronger language and also an invitation. but i think at the end, he also realized, you know, rather than being sort of sour grapes on the 1st day, he did change his tone and said that he was very grateful for all the support us as the pied nearly 40000000000 and military assistance since last february and europe

has also stepped up, so i think there is across the board agreement that ukraine should be a member of nato. it's just a question of when the right window of opportunity will arise. a crane is a member of nato, so that nato membership, that is russia's security night, ma'am. scenario, the tutoring desperately wanted to avoid. actually, one of the reasons he started his war against you kind of the 1st place now is that fear justified and how serious is the perceived threat to russia. over 1000000, new cranes are currently fighting against russia. in peacetime, ukraine's army is 200000 strong. those troops would be added to nato's current number of 3300000. active soldiers. ukrainian army, trained and armed by the west could become one of the best and the defense of alliance. after the war is over nato territory,

which expanded significantly to the east after the cold war, would continue to grow on the russian border. if you crane were added, it is the 2nd largest european country after russia. southern nato countries would then be direct neighbors with russia. the common border would be extended by almost 2000 kilometers to around $4500.00. this would be the worst case scenario from the russian perspective. as natal soldiers could be stationed on ukrainian soil, and nato military bases set up their ukraine as a natal member, how would russia respond? i'll make it up as situations sooner than many. may think. you have said a marcus that the by october, this october 2023. the one new frame will be over. not exactly. i have said it will be strategic a last for russia, and that is

a different saying that it doesn't mean that combat will end in october, but we will have a situation where rush, the attrition of the ocean. russian armed forces is so great that fruits and we'll have to think about whether it makes sense from rational point of view to continue the full. and i think that is, that is the very strategic plan. the, the now clearly shows, i mean, he could have had it all. and so then even off to the will have started even in march 22 before the butcher and the up in mass. because when publicly known had offered what we could end the war. now, and we could become as a, as ukraine, as a, we could become a neutral country and we could forego our aspirations to ever become a membership. now approaching, had the chance to have less than they do. and now he's got them all night. and no one but himself is to blame for this and no one but himself is to blame for the aggression for the attrition of the russian army, for all the dead soldiers and civilians. and i think that is with respect to that is lost among many and that that is a great fault in many western discussions. we believe all mean ukraine would mean

to prolong the will. it's the opposite. the sooner we stop this wall, the better for the what we need, that's without doubt. true, but do you agree? i agree that definitely it's major miscalculation, that a crime problem. moral point for sure. but also strategically for russia, because nato was non threatening. russia is a, has a nuclear deterrent. russia used to have a very strong conventional army. we will find out whether it's a stronger conventional capability or weaker when and if the war is over the next years. but i think that's till october 20 free russia still has capacity to go on. i think that russian produces a lot of material. yes. in fewer compared to west or within that ukraine is getting . but western military industrial base needs to get up to speed, to deliver everything that you create needs where russia is working just for this war. and then there is also the ability to bring more people to the front line.

russia has brought around 250000 people in a couple of this general colors estimate. that's the supreme commander of nato in europe, over the last people's invalidation. now russia has a lot of legislations in place, so that would allow them to do this. gland is fine, stealth mobilization without analysis of this without creating a popular pushback, but also bringing into the front flies to di, thousands of and strategically. it's last brochure, it's nato expansion. it's ukraine last forever, and adding mazda deal, running for generations. but tactically, unfortunately, this war and has civilities can continue for some years, for sure. but also beach fulton is in denial about the fact that he is lost. i don't know the war this could go on. as i said, that we could now have a very boring discussion about attrition rates, about how fast the russian army is going down at the moment. $4.00 tanks per day, 6 infantry fighting vehicles per day. they are the author to raise

a try to enormously at this time. and i don't believe that whatever the russian army is doing right now and ukraine is in any way sustainable. and if you're just extrapolate the attrition rates into the future it's, it's pretty obvious what will happen from the military point of view i, i'm not very interested in all the political dialogue that accompanies all of that . but i believe that teaching was misinformed or at least ill informed when he spelt it as well. i think he massively exaggerated an over estimate of his military capabilities. he was unaware of all the in fighting. and the factions that now exist in the russian army and we have to really be aware of the fact that today's rushing on it is not the read all me. it's not the soviet on the of the 1980s. it's something completely different and what, what strikes me really is, is the, the lack of a capability to adapt, the lack of, of, of designing, of lessons learned, or they keep making the same mistakes. the attrition rate is not going down. it's stable for months now. and what if,

if you take the discussion from that point of view, it's, it's a simple fact if logistics the war is not one. but while there's also one that's caused by bravery and by a battles, but it's primarily one by electricity. and that is my perspective on to that i haven't had all of this. do you think that suddenly putting once he realizes that he kind of gained anymore that he was still for says realistic. so, i mean, i think alexander would be a better and dialogue or for that question. but i can tell you that of course, boot and still has supporters in china, iran, but you know, there's also signs of change. look, a turkey, for example, turkey was open to swedish membership and to nato. let ukrainian soldiers go home and has also seems to now sort of the n has agreed to nato membership for ukraine. so i think there are positive signs as well. so it may

be a question of, as marco says, attrition, but also how much longer can put and also have this way over it. so these countries that are swing states like india, like china, in terms of support for his more me now. um, let me come to the helps that are ukraine again is getting more help is is on the way germany is helping you frame with weapons, but it can hardly afford to do so. the country is suffering from decades of under investment is own armed forces because the cold war was all. but wasn't that the backfires now? but on the pressure from may to germany is finally and reluctant, the ramping up its defense spending. but could it be too little to light? the german is going to say it has been tightening its belts for years now and is having to continuously replace the arms being donated to ukraine. it has to remain

a fully equipped operational and coming back of army. also to detect the alliance despite austerity measures, germany's defense budget has grown by 1700000000 to almost 52000000000 euros. but that is still not the 2 percent of the economic output is pledge to nato. the difference is meant to come from the german government's $100000000000.00 euro special fund, intended for large armament projects such as the f, $35.00 stealth drafts. germany has also promised nato a division of 15000 soldiers in 2025. but their readiness will only be managed to limited extent. according to an internal document from march of this year. germany's defense minister boris. the story is also surprised, simple and despair. with another announcement, $4000.00 troops are to be permanently stationed in lithuania, to secure nato's eastern flank. experts say that will be an enormous effort. change

in the bonus there. but cont, germany fulfill its promises. that's the question that we want to ask. let's start with the $4000.00 soldiers to the east and flag. would that make a difference? well, it sounds like a lot. i would say it's a fast little walter drop is the division, is it? no it's, it's not. but you have to start somewhere. i mean you, you said just just before we we have this other little video sequence that the coldwell was over. i'm not so sure. probably it has what we thought it was. yes. but probably has. it has just pause for 33 years because we still have to deal with an imperial russia. who is motives are clearly um, gets towards, um, uh, what, what process believes to be it's fear of info is. and as long as that's thinking is present in, in russian politics, we have to think about how to handle this. and the weakness of european policy over

the last 3 decades was to well, to accommodate that russian thinking. look at what, what europe did after 2014 nothing. and then in 2015 we have them in cycles, which basically, well was, we could say it was sort of a presence for russia. russian aggression was not confronted, it was tolerated, and it was made prominent and it suddenly enabled the full invasion of 2022. and i think that is now the great tiny point in european policy. but you also see the long, long way you would have to go until you have something like we had in the 1980s. your pin on these that are not only strong but also capable. and i mean that, that's the point for me. um, it's just not enough to pull more money into a system that is not effective. the western european always have to go from the mental process to undergo fundamental process of transformation. and that would take a lot of time pulling them to understand that now i'm not so sure about germany. it, that might, is my next question i saw, you know, doing a lot with regard to germany. what do you say to the, i mean,

i tend to agree with marcus and the sense that it's not just about money and germany. i don't think can we go it's way out of the 2 percent commitment at this point, even though it's going to have to confronted soon, the special military fund will cover it for a little while, but there has to be, you know, obviously in the permanent budget and increase in terms of military spending and not just for sort of human resources. but i think more importantly, is that a strategic culture needs to be in place in terms of being more efficient, not having inhibitions about having a strong military industry. so that means the private sector needs to work hand in hand with the government, but that is occurring the so called turning point in germany is i think in policy circles is being embraced by the mainstream parties. it's now just a matter of the citizens also realizing that har, strategic choices will have to take place when it comes to spending and sort of the

good years of just, you know, going out money will not be present in the near future. do you think that but brush that will be impressed by the announcements of more money being put into the armed forces and these are countries. i mean is only 11 of the 31. they to members actually reach this 2 percent. a special thing now says roger believes that nato is the us. so if we look at the 16 plus month of this conflict, russian has never touched something that's covered by article 5 like russia. he knows that neither has steve that this, the american teeth for don monthly and nothing really has happened with russia tried on the margins with cyber domain and stuff, but was not very successful. so unfortunately, it falls on ukraine. we're russia will not be impressed. i will say i'm not talking and go home like i going to destroy this country and unfortunately that's now pollutants plan to make you crazy. unbelievable, destroyed,

denied story tauriel integrity and denied the ability to reconstruct and for the people who are left, who have left the country to return back home. that's the plan now, such as a well, i would say it's certainly this the last result to measure that the dresser can take. now. there is a, i would say in imperial motive and that policy would rush. i cannot have russian destroys. you clearly see that in all the world, crimes that have been committed so fond, the systematic destruction of energy, of electricity infrastructure um, systematic destruction of the conditions of living and all of these all kinds of course. but i don't think it wouldn't break your crane. i think it would make your brain hotter and stronger off to the will and we will have a very different to crank slab, a country that is pro west from that is on to the teeth. and that will act as some sort of great to west berlin. so some, oh, i would say some window that portrays to the russian side, look, this is what every slavic nation could become. this is the well in, in a way,

the exact opposite of what you have in russia. this is a positive image for the future. and one that is defended. one that has teased one that will not be invaded again. and now guess what that will do to russian internal policy? i think that that's probably a, a longer term motive, and that is also in this, well, many people talk about so called values that are now being defended. i'm not so sure. ukraine fights now for its territorial integrity for its sovereignty, for its survival. and that i think is a very strong motive that unites a nation and probably creates a new, a new sort of, of nation. i think it's, it's very similar to 2 great independent schools. we have in, in history you, uh, just mentioned what a strong you, crane family attached to the west, maybe even a member of nato. what will that do to, to the internal russian, russian politics? what did you say that i've seen that ukraine will be very onto russian for

generations for understandable reasons. after all, the war crimes commitment, there will be no easy reconciliation because the reconciliation between poland to germany was a chief through complete deceit and unconditional surrender. it's very hard for me to see ukrainian or need to flag to be put on the red square. so even if russia doesn't cheapest strategic goals in ukraine and doesn't break it so your grand stands and have been regains territorial integrity. we have examples like saddam hussein who lost his war against iran, who then try to be great and was pushed back. and then it took 13 years and a full blown us invasion to take him out. so even if pressure lose us in ukraine, the regime itself might be preserved and become really bitter understanding that we didn't succeed because of the west. so i don't think that there will be a trend line for a liberalization they might. but i think that the window of opportunity is very tiny little so that the architecture of the security architecture of yours is

shifting to the interest. uh with this. what kind of consequences does that have for the rest of your people that the traditional base of, let's say nato would like? sure we strongly and, but i mean, i think we talked about how more troops are needed on the eastern flank. and i think that's another reason why there was also a pause in terms of emitting ukraine because at this moment in time, i think washington understands that if that were to happen, more troops would be necessary on the eastern flank. and it would be the united states that would send its blood and treasure. so the hope is that in the near future, europe can build up its defense capabilities to, to be a strong actor. conventionally, as the united states also looks at challenges and the endo pacific. so i think that needs to happen. and it's wonderful that there has been nato cohesion this past year with the war against ukraine. and i think everybody agrees that ukraine will

make natal stronger, make the values that undergird the west, stronger because it's fighting for those values. i actually think they are values embed in the un charter and they're fighting for democratic values. so i do think that in the short term, europe does need to increase its military capability. so the united states could also look to the challenges in the end of the civic uh, before we come to an end, i would like to get your opinion on this will possibly be finished by the end of the year. let's put it that way. how realistic is that very briefly past? i am not a military expert, so i wouldn't know. but if that were to happen, i think that would be good for us. politics going into an election year. one would be strategically lost, but come back would probably go on for a number of months, but it will not change the end results. the end result is a free,

i'm suffering ukraine and the board is of $91.00. i would believe that unfortunately this is a long board that we are facing. thank you very much to my panel. that was today's edition off to the point and i hope you enjoyed our discussion. that was what you think down here in the comments. if you happen to, if you happen to watch us on youtube being key and to hear from and for now for me and the team. thanks the,

the, the, and the military is be modernized, japanese young, aren't interested in service, recruits,

dw, stopping climate change. that's what they're aiming for. we want to achieve re thinking and society assume about commitment and hope about visions and the people behind them, the inverting catastrophe, climate change, the 75 minutes on dw, the

it says stop for more and move on to the basic goals, pitching the countries beaches to a guessing push back even from their own families. i can be this weekend and running on a more dial. i will, i should have done the slicing. social norm seeking is self determined goals. escape from treasury and abuse starts oldest based on d, w. the

. this is dw news live from berlin. russia threatens to walk away from the black sea greenville. the air long dale expires on monday and dangerous vital ukrainian brain exports to the world. president vladimir putin is using the pressure to push back on the western section.