general, have an insurance and i'll bring the secret off music as medicine, the on dw would or sports scoring. we say they were about never giving up sports flies every weekend. on dw, the nasal somebody didn't build is, was towed as a some of those products. it's showing unity on spring. how united is the alliance? really, that been doubts about that lady. rachel wants to be prepared to counter the new main enemy. russia will money, most soldiers, tons more weapons alliance 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, i'm glad that with, as well comes it 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 direct or if they kind of, you rush all eurasia sent to us. i think time on marcus, co chair of defense economics optima, military tab 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 of summit was it a success? and if sofa 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 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, the 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 the 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 we just explained as this is a simplified, the most speedy access to data is exactly the same. what, what nato did with finland's and sweden's attempts to, to join waiving the the membership action plan. i mean that is the right examples in, in, in they don't members the take, for example, croatia all daniel of knows, and macedonia web, that accession periods took years or even decades. and 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 institution reforms up and pass them 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 should not join 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 biden was very clear caught, is that a successful months ago? i think that's something that's already baked in in the problem. those 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 pro long investment in its defense capacity, including building up the ukraine 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 will go away. so i 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 offers these 5. do you agree? we have 0 evidence to support this? and i think that jake sullivan's, the national security advisor, was on the record saying that that's not the case. but yes, there are channels of communication to the russians about to 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 groundless, 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 its voters in its 1991 board is 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 interests. we have the world or of 90 and 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

issue, but also long term. and talk of sort of having the is really model apply to ukraine is also very beneficial. look at the relationship is really mobile 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 lensky, 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 pod, 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, created the 1st place. now, is that fear justified? and how serious is the perceived threat to russia? over 1000000 ukraine's are currently fighting against russia in peace time, 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 7 nato countries within the direct neighbors with russia, the common border would be extended by almost 2000 kilometers to around 4500. this would be the worst case scenario from the russian perspective. as natal soldiers could be stationed on ukrainian soil and nato military base to set up their ukraine as a nato 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 you find will be over. not exactly. i have said it will be strategic a last for russia and that is

a different thing. and that doesn't mean that combat will end in october, but we will have a situation where rush, the attrition of the rational impulse is so great that children will 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 salted, even in march, 22 before the butcher. and the open massacres 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 on it. 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 us 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 get that's without the 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 natal 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 in 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 ability to bring more people to the front line. russia

has brought around 250000 people in couple of this, general people is 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 or that could allow them to do this kind of stein, stealth liberalization. without analysis of this, without creating a popular pushback, but also bringing to the front flies to di, thousands of then strategically. it's last brochure, it's nato expansion. it's ukraine last forever and animosity a running for generations but tactically, unfortunately, this war and has still it is, can continue for some years, for sure. but also be no way of pushing isn't denial about the fact that he has lost the war. this could go on as i said it. and we, 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 in ukraine isn't anyway sustainable. and if you 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 to team was misinformed, or at least still in phones 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 didn't now exist in the russian army, and we have to really be aware of the fact that today's russian army is not the red army. it's not the soviet only 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 that they keep making the same mistakes their tricia rate is not going down. it's stable for months now. and what if,

if it takes the discussion from that point of view, it's, it's a simple fact if logistics the war is not one by. while there's also one that's caused by bravery and by a battles, but it's primarily won 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 gain 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 students still has supporters in china, iran, but you know, there's also the size 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 war now. um, let me come to the helps tabs are ukraine again is getting more help is is on the way germany is helping you crane 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 under pressure from may to germany is finally and reluctantly ramping up its defense spending. but could it be too little to light? germany is going to say it has been tightening it's belts for years. now it 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 become the alliance. despite austerity measures, germany's defense budget has grown by one point southern 1000000000 to almost 52000000000 euros. but that it's still not the 2 percent of the economic output is pledge to nato. the difference is meant to come from the german governments, 100000000000 euro special fund, intended for large armament projects such as the f, 35 still to chance. germany has also promise nato, a division of 15000 soldiers in 2025. but their readiness will only be managed to a 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 point of sale, but can 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 on this 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 a what, what process believes to be it's fear of info. so, 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 you're a bit after 2014 nothing. and then in 2015 we have them in cycles. which basically, well was, we could say was sort of a presence for russia. russian aggression was not confronted, it was tolerated, and it was made prominent and exactly enabled the full invasion of 2022. and i think that is now the great turning 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. now the western european always have to go fund a mental process to undergo fundamental process of transformation. and that would take a lot of time permanent, understands that now i'm not so sure about germany that, 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 confront it 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 the strategic culture and 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 our 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. but do you think that that 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 $11.00 of the $31.00. they told them was actually reach this 2 percent. a special thing that says roger believes that nato is the us. so if we look at the 16 plus month of this conflict, russia has never touched something that's covered by article 5, like russia knows that need to have steve, that this, the american teeth predominantly. 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 packing and go home like i going to destroy this country. and unfortunately, bad smell pollutants plan to make you crazy. unbelievable, destroyed,

denied. so 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, it's certainly this the last result to measure that the dresser can take. now. there is a, i would say an imperial motive and that policy would rush. it cannot have rush and 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 on war crimes, of course. but i don't think it wouldn't break your crane. i think it would make you cry and hotter and stronger off to the wall. 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 for them. 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 with not being bated again. and now guess what? that's what i'll 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 cause 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 the 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 or a complete deceit and unconditional surrender. it is very hard for me to see ukrainian or anita flag to be put on the red square. so even if russia doesn't, she, if it's read you goals in ukraine and doesn't break it. so you grant stands and if it were against your total integrity, we have examples like saddam hussein who lost his war against iran, who then try to be weight 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 better 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, the security architecture of yours is shifting to the east with this. what kind of consequences does that have for the rest of europe for the, the traditional base of let's say, nate's over like? sure, we strongly, and 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. 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 once we strategically last, but combat 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 borders of $91.00. i would believe that unfortunately, this is a long for that we are facing. thank you very much to my panel. that was today's, it is often to the point of view. i 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 in the team. thanks, the,

the, the shift your guide to life in the digital world. to explore the latest online, trying to navigate your way through the digital jungle. get a global perspective. we'll be your guide and show you what's possible

to decide what really matters to you. shift coming up in the long d, w. me the power of sounds from being a baby to the melodies and regions as an insurance brain. the secret of music has met the on d w. people in trucks, india and when trying to feed the city center more and more refugees are being turned away. families these trades pieces,

extreme. getting 200 people around the world more than 160000000. in west village. we ask why? because no one should have the make up your own mind. me for mine's the assassination. it's so soft for more little bagley bessy. go pacing the country's beaches to las vegas and push back even from their own families. i can be this weekend on monday.

i'm or now i will, i shrugged on the spicing social norms so you can use self determination goals. escape from treasury and abuse. starts oldest based on d, w. the . this is the w news and these are all top stories. hollywood actors have joined screen rights as in that 1st single time you strike in more than 6 decades to move kite's has forced us to do is to shut down production as unions them on back to pay and protection against a i.