Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00Well, dear friends, dear friends of the Munich Security Conference, NATO and the transatlantic
00:09relationship have been at the core of this event even in the times of, especially in
00:19the times of the Cold War when it was still called Wehrkunde, but the issues of how can
00:26NATO help protect us, what is the role of the United States has been a core element,
00:34the backbone really of decades of the Munich Security Conference.
00:39I am extremely happy to have on the stage for a relatively brief, relatively brief panel
00:45discussion, the new, in this capacity, first time NATO Secretary General, he's been here
00:53many times as the previous Prime Minister of the Netherlands, Mark Rutte, a warm welcome
00:59to you.
01:00Let's give him a hand.
01:06And we have two longtime friends of the Munich Security Conference from the U.S. Senate,
01:11Secretary General Shaheen from New Hampshire, and of course, Lindsey Graham, without whom
01:24no Munich Security Conference is thinkable.
01:33So we need to, we have a good half hour, so I would want to ask my panelists to try
01:41to be brief so that we can get as much information into this and maybe take as many questions
01:49as may be asked by this expert audience.
01:56And let me start by addressing a question to the Secretary General.
02:01What happened over the last 72 hours or so, President Trump's announcements, the Brussels
02:10meeting, Vice President Vance's speech yesterday, has of course raised many continuing questions
02:20about where is NATO headed.
02:24We have a NATO summit coming up later this spring or early summer.
02:30Can you just sketch out, hopefully in just a couple of minutes, what your expectations
02:36are, how you want to take NATO forward as we try to meet really historic challenges?
02:44This is not, and I think everybody in this audience understands this, this is not an
02:49easy moment for all of us.
02:51And it is a particularly tough moment for our Ukrainian friends, President Zelensky
02:58spoke here just less than an hour ago, and he got what I thought was appropriate, standing
03:06applause.
03:07So, without further ado, Secretary General, you have the floor first.
03:11Well, thank you for that question.
03:14Let me say that I'm really honored to be on the panel with two distinguished senators
03:18who have been staunch supporters of the transatlantic relationship, really, both of you.
03:23Thank you for your leadership.
03:24And to your question, I'm rather optimistic.
03:27And I'm optimistic because when you look at the undercurrent messages, what is clearly
03:33coming through in my meetings with the Vice President and many other senior American officials,
03:40but also coming through at the podium and at other occasions, is one, that we are one
03:45family.
03:46There is an absolute commitment of the U.S., including this administration to NATO, but
03:50also an expectation that on the European side, we have to step up, we have to spend
03:54more.
03:55And they are right.
03:56We are not spending enough.
03:57So we have to do that.
03:58And that will be a key theme in The Hague, to come to a new number, a new figure, based
04:04on real content of what is driving us in terms of the gaps, where are we now, where we should
04:10be, if in four or five years' time, we still want to be able to defend ourselves.
04:14Secondly, on Ukraine, there is a clear, common understanding and commitment that we have
04:19to make sure that Ukraine is in the best possible place during the peace talks.
04:24That means continuing the training in Ukraine, continuing all the weapons supplies into Ukraine,
04:29but also that the outcome of peace talks has to be that Ukraine is a country which will
04:36never again be challenged by the Russians, by Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin.
04:40It has to be an enduring, a lasting peace.
04:43There is absolute, Americans and Europeans, we are absolutely in agreement on this.
04:47And to my European friends, I would say, get into the debate, not by complaining that
04:52you might, yes or not, be at the table, but by coming up with concrete proposals, ideas,
04:59ramp up the spending, make sure that the training and the weapons supplies continue, but also
05:02come up with concrete ideas, what, for example, security guarantees could look like.
05:08And I must say, since one day of complaining, what I have now been seeing on the European
05:11side of NATO is indeed that people are now getting into the concrete planning phase of
05:16what could that be, what can we contribute to that.
05:19And finally, of course, the third issue also in The Hague will be about this huge problem
05:24that we are not producing nearly enough, both in the US and on the European side of NATO
05:29in terms of our defence industrial base.
05:32Russia is now producing in three months an ammunition what the whole of NATO, 20 times
05:37bigger than Russia in its overall size of the economy, is producing an ammunition in
05:41a year.
05:42So we are not keeping up.
05:44Russia is on a war footing, Russia is on a war economy.
05:47We are not.
05:48We have to do this.
05:49We have to cut the red tape.
05:50And by the way, to our American friends, it is also good business, because the European
05:54allies spend four times more in the US than the US is spending in Europe.
05:58So ramping up defence industry production will also deliver a lot of dollars for the
06:03American economy.
06:04So these will be the three main themes coming to The Hague.
06:06Great.
06:07Thank you very much.
06:08May I say, ladies first, when I turn to the US Senate, Senator Shaheen, one of the issues
06:15mentioned by the Secretary General was the famous financial contribution to the defence
06:23budget throughout NATO.
06:28Eleven years ago, at a summit in Wales, NATO members agreed the 2% goal.
06:37Of course, your predecessor and you are now saying, well, we've made a lot of progress.
06:44More than two-thirds or so of the NATO members have reached the 2% goal.
06:48But let me put a bit of water into the wine.
06:52It took for many of us, of the member countries, it took considerable time to reach that goal.
06:58In the case of my own country, we can now proudly say that this year we reached finally
07:04the 2%.
07:06What is your view where we should end up?
07:10What is a realistic, achievable goal looking forward and when, if you establish a new goal,
07:19I think you mentioned 3.5%, when do we think that that can actually be accomplished?
07:27Surely not this year.
07:28Surely not next year.
07:30In what kind of, we're talking about what kind of timeframe.
07:33I am aware of the fact that this is an urgent question and before you take the floor, let
07:40me add one comment as a European member of NATO.
07:45When we talk about the 2% or the 3.5%, the single most important thing in my mind is
07:54that we present this to our publics, not as something that we do to make President Trump
08:00happy.
08:02We do it for our own security here in Europe.
08:07That's what makes this hopefully acceptable and supportable by our publics.
08:13Senator, you have the floor.
08:15Well, absolutely.
08:16For those of us who are in an elective office, we understand that we're not going to be in
08:20an elective office very long if our public doesn't support what we're doing.
08:26There are already some NATO members who are over the 3.5% and that's great news, but I
08:32think NATO has to sit down and as a consensus organization, which it is, decide what's the
08:38appropriate number and how fast to get there.
08:41But you mentioned the important and critical point and that is for the defense of Europe,
08:47for the defense of the free world, it is important that we ramp up this number because what we
08:54know is that our adversaries, whether it's Vladimir Putin or President Xi in China or
09:00North Korea or Iran, they are looking at what we do and they are going to calibrate
09:06what they do in response to how strong they think we are in the West and in the free world.
09:13And so this is a critical discussion and make no mistake, one of the issues in Ukraine,
09:19and this is a conversation we're having in the United States, is that it's not just about
09:26Ukraine and what happens there.
09:29It's about what kind of message do we send to our allies and what kind of message do
09:33we send to our adversaries if we walk away from the brave Ukrainians in this courageous
09:39fight.
09:40Great, thank you very much.
09:45Senator Graham has participated in these NATO debates for decades.
09:53I've tried to research when you came here for the first time.
09:57It must have been the last century because we don't have any records of that.
10:00There's only 12.
10:01But it was a long time ago.
10:03So thanks again for being here once again.
10:06You have the floor.
10:07I think it was 1998, I can't remember, but I came here with John McCain and Joe Lieberman
10:11and I missed them both.
10:13So NATO in Latin means stability.
10:19Roger Wickers here, he's the chairman of the Armed Services Committee.
10:22When I talk about NATO at home, I talk, what do we get?
10:26Stability is good, don't you think?
10:27Being able to travel, let's see if this is Trump.
10:35He would have gladly talked, I'm sure.
10:44Okay, so NATO is good because it creates stability.
10:50It's better to have partners than it is to go it alone.
10:53So when I'm at home, why does it matter what happens in the Mideast?
10:58I believe there are people who want to kill us all and change our way of life because
11:03they're religious fanatics.
11:05You can stop fighting them, but they're not going to stop fighting you.
11:08I'd rather keep the fight over there than come to America.
11:11I'd rather have partners than go it alone.
11:13There are forces in the world that I'd rather have friends help me contain than do it by
11:20myself.
11:21I want stability, I don't want war.
11:23So NATO has stood the test of time.
11:26Not one NATO nation has ever been invaded by a nation state.
11:30It works.
11:31So we're expanding, that's a good thing.
11:34We're in good hands with Mark.
11:36He's a worthy successor.
11:38Mark spoke yesterday, you were excellent, I am so glad you have this job.
11:43You've got a real sense of where we need to go.
11:47Frustrating for American politicians goes back to Sam Nunn.
11:51Remember Sam Nunn?
11:52I would say he's not Donald Trump.
11:56But he threatened to withdraw 30,000 troops a year unless NATO hit their target.
12:03This goes long and deep in America on both sides of the aisle.
12:08We feel like we've done more and you've done less and everybody's under pressure at home.
12:16So it's not 2%, it's not 3.5% to me, it's what do we want to achieve?
12:23The spending needs to be based on the threat.
12:27I think there are a lot of threats that would justify 3.5%.
12:31Finally, the American Senate is firmly in NATO's camp.
12:37There's an isolationist movement in the Republican Party and our liberal friends, Bernie Sanders
12:44wanted to cut the military budget yet again.
12:49We've dealt with that since the founding of NATO.
12:52But NATO, we need it now more than ever and let me tell you why.
12:59Putin would not invade a NATO nation in my view because he understands the consequences
13:06would be too severe.
13:09You agree with that?
13:11We got to make him believe he's right.
13:14Ukraine, 2014, we got it wrong.
13:20Everybody who's worried about who Trump's talking to and how he's doing it, what did
13:24you do in 2014?
13:27Three things we failed to do in 2014.
13:29We should have integrated our economies with Ukraine to give them hope and have a trip
13:35wire so it wouldn't happen again.
13:37But we didn't do that because we didn't want to provoke Putin.
13:41We should have built up the Ukrainian military so it would have been harder to invade.
13:45We didn't do that because we didn't want to provoke Putin.
13:48And we never told him what happens if you do it again because we didn't want to deal
13:53with provoking Putin.
13:56Lessons learned.
13:58Don't worry about provoking Putin.
14:01Worry about stopping Putin.
14:03So three things real quickly.
14:08This minerals agreement between the United States and Ukraine is a game changer because
14:14President Trump can go to the American people and say Ukraine's not a burden, it's a benefit.
14:19They're sitting on top of trillion dollars worth of minerals that all of us can benefit
14:24from by aligning with the West.
14:26I told President Trump, it may be the old Soviet Union, it may be the Russian empire,
14:30but I do know he's going after the money.
14:32Don't let him steal what Ukraine has to enrich himself because that's like defunding the
14:38police.
14:39So if this minerals agreement happens, it's a nightmare for Putin because we have something
14:45to defend that we didn't have before.
14:47So you better be pulling for this minerals agreement.
14:49Number two, if we don't arm Ukraine to the fullest extent possible, shame on all of us.
14:56They need more F-16s, not less, and we make them in South Carolina.
15:01And all of us are going to help them buy this stuff because they don't have enough
15:04money themselves to have a 1.3 million person army.
15:09But we'd be stupid in the next decade not to create the most lethal Ukrainian army possible
15:14as a form of deterrence.
15:15And finally, NATO.
15:18I'm all for Ukraine being in NATO, but it's up to the members of NATO.
15:22I don't want to take off their potential of getting into NATO, but I'm not so sure the
15:27market will bear if they go into NATO right now.
15:29I'm just being honest with you.
15:31But here's what I think we could sell.
15:33If you ever do this again, Putin, if you ever have a military incursion into Ukraine again,
15:39that would trigger automatic admission into NATO by Ukraine.
15:44We should have done that in 2014.
15:47How many of you believe if that had been in place in 2014, Putin wouldn't have invaded?
15:53I don't think he would have if he knows that would put him in NATO.
15:57So thanks for having me.
15:59Great.
16:06Can I go back once again to Senator Shaheen?
16:10One of the questions that's just been addressed, or at least indirectly addressed, is the question
16:15of security guarantees.
16:18If, as Senator Graham has just pointed out, it looks relatively unlikely not only because
16:28what Secretary of Defense Hicks publicly said a couple of days ago in Brussels, but
16:35we all know that that is not likely to happen right now.
16:40So what's your thinking about security guarantees?
16:47My own view as a longtime diplomat is that paper is usually not much worse than paper.
16:55So what about hardware solutions?
16:59And I was impressed by what Senator Graham just said about arming Ukraine.
17:06Somebody wrote about this and said this is the porcupine option.
17:10In other words, making of Ukraine, in terms of military strength, a kind of a porcupine
17:16that even a tiger would hate to attack because it's going to be very painful.
17:22So if we can...
17:24What's your view about that?
17:26Strengthening the Ukrainian army and strengthening Ukrainian society to the point where they
17:32are going to be probably by far the technologically best equipped, most experienced, strongest,
17:42most capable armed forces anywhere in Europe, which would create in and of itself a major
17:49kind of deterrent to anyone, including, of course, in particular the Russian side.
17:54How do you think about that?
17:56Well, I think a number of things.
17:59First of all, I like Lindsey's idea about, you know, if Russia invades again, then NATO,
18:07Ukraine is automatically a member of NATO.
18:09But I also think we shouldn't take NATO membership off the table in negotiations.
18:14You never, from my perspective, you never start a negotiation from a point of weakness.
18:19So you never take your leverage off the table.
18:24I think Secretary Hegseth misspoke.
18:27And we saw the Vice President try and walk that back in his interview with the Wall Street
18:33Journal where he said, from our perspective in the United States, everything should be
18:37on the table, including the potential for troops on the ground.
18:41So I think we need to think about what kind of equipment we can provide and support to
18:48the Ukrainians to put them in the strongest position possible.
18:52How strong sanctions can we put on Vladimir Putin?
18:56And then for the long term, there are a number of ways to do a security guarantee.
19:01A part of it needs to be, as you point out so well, making sure that the Ukrainian army
19:07continues to have what they need to defend their country.
19:10But I think we need more than that as we're thinking about how do we prevent Vladimir
19:15Putin from doing this again.
19:17We need to make it very clear that somebody is going to defend Ukraine other than Ukraine.
19:25And whether that's NATO membership, whether it's some sort of a multilateral force as
19:31we have in Korea to defend the demilitarized zone, I think there are a number of ways to
19:38do it.
19:39But the important thing is that Ukraine is comfortable and that Russia and Vladimir Putin
19:45know that this is not going to be tolerated again.
19:49One quick thought.
19:51If I were nominating somebody to be the NATO man of the year, it would be Putin.
19:57He's done more to help NATO than we have.
19:59We have two new members.
20:01We're talking about spending more, not less.
20:04So he's made a serious miscalculation.
20:07I do believe that if he understood you do this again, your worst nightmare of Ukraine
20:14being a NATO is a certainty, would be a deterrent.
20:19Let me turn back to the Secretary General.
20:24Now that the question has come up about the possible, assuming a ceasefire is arranged,
20:35the possibility of foreign, maybe European and other troops being deployed to secure
20:43a contact line or to secure a ceasefire, let the audience know how you think about that.
20:53And before you answer, let me just share one German view.
20:58We have often, since the 1990s, Lindsey will remember this, we have often said, because
21:04Germany was always hesitant for historical reasons, but in terms of deploying troops
21:10to foreign countries, we kept saying to ourselves, to our publics, in together, out together.
21:17If the U.S. decides to go into Bosnia or Kosovo, we will be going with them.
21:23We said the same in the case of Afghanistan.
21:25But the out together was also important.
21:28In other words, if they leave, we leave.
21:31So if, what I understand is that there is a desire by the Trump administration not even
21:40to consider the deployment of troops, okay, but would that not create, if we had European
21:48troops in some shape or form in Ukraine, would that not create a kind of a rather risky possibility,
21:57a potential division, which maybe Putin could try to exploit?
22:03One abstract level higher, what I think we all agree on, including the current U.S. administration
22:11and European side of NATO, is that whatever comes out of these peace negotiations has
22:16to be lasting.
22:18And that means that it has to be credible.
22:22And then, of course, the senators write that there are many ways to organize that.
22:27But why is it so crucial that it is lasting?
22:29Because if it is only Ukrainians taking care of Ukraine post the peace deal, I don't think
22:35that is strong enough.
22:37And don't forget that one Xi Jinping, the first secretary of the Communist Party of
22:42China, is listening in to these talks.
22:44And whenever President Trump and Zelensky and Putin and others would start these talks,
22:50there is one empty chair which is very much filled with this same one Xi Jinping, the
22:54first secretary of the Communist Party of China.
22:57And he will be watching.
22:59And if the outcome of these talks is a weak deal for the West, given the fact that North
23:04Korea, China, and Iran are all involved in this, it will have a huge impact.
23:08I'm getting more phone calls these days from senior leaders in Japan, Korea, Australia,
23:13New Zealand, and from many allies in Europe.
23:15And by the way, I don't need more phone calls from allies in Europe, but just to sketch
23:20to you that they understand that the Euro-Atlantic and the inner Pacific are connected.
23:25So we have to make sure that it is enduring, that it is lasting.
23:30And my problem is, we are democracies.
23:32We discuss this all out in the open.
23:33But somewhere in Moscow, with a small cigar in his head, is Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin
23:38listening probably now to this fantastic panel and thinking, OK, what can I learn from this?
23:44And what are they thinking in terms of what these security guarantees should look like?
23:47So I'm a bit hesitant to debate it all out in the open.
23:51But clearly, what I said to the European colleagues yesterday, make sure that you come up with
23:55concrete proposals and get into the debate.
23:57That's important.
23:58Great.
23:59We have something like 10 minutes left.
24:04Can I look around and invite people to, if you could be kind enough to identify yourselves.
24:11I know most of the audience, but not everybody by their names.
24:15So we'll look at the lady here.
24:17I think I know her name.
24:19Please.
24:20The microphone is coming.
24:22Natalie Tocci.
24:28Question to the two senators.
24:29I'm just wondering if you could help us interpret a little bit what we heard yesterday.
24:34So up until yesterday, and I think the gist also of this panel was very much based on,
24:42and I think the Secretary General of NATO was reflecting that, on the one hand, Europe
24:46is attacked, starting from Ukraine, but not ending with Ukraine.
24:50So Russia, we get that.
24:52And the United States is, let's say, less interested in European security and certainly
24:57expecting Europeans to do more.
24:59We get that too.
25:00Now, what we heard yesterday was, I think, something different, which is actually this
25:04U.S. administration is very interested in Europe, but it's interested in dividing Europe,
25:10in weakening Europe.
25:12So can you perhaps persuade us that that is a wrong interpretation?
25:18Okay.
25:19Lindsay, you get to do this one.
25:20Can we maybe take one or two more, and then go back to the panel?
25:26There was one way back, lady in the back, yeah.
25:30I think that's Svitlana, yeah.
25:32Right.
25:33Yes.
25:34Svitlana Zelishchuk, Ukrainian politician.
25:35First of all, dear speakers, thank you so much for your leadership in supporting Ukraine
25:41We very appreciate it.
25:42I have a question to Senator Graham.
25:45You suggested that Ukraine should be taken to NATO automatically if Putin will attack
25:53it again.
25:55But in my mind, it's a perfect reason for Putin not to stop the current war.
26:02So my question is, can you please give us, like, three very concrete points of what President
26:09Trump is ready to do now to stop the current war?
26:15Okay.
26:16And we'll take one more here from the first row, lady.
26:20Thank you very much.
26:21I'm Sylvia Mario with CNBC.
26:22I have a question for Secretary General Mark Rutte.
26:24Good to see you again.
26:25I just would like to understand, where do you think we're going to land in terms of
26:31the next ceiling for defense spending?
26:34Because yes, we're talking about this, but let's not forget the fiscal position for many
26:38European countries is very weak at this stage, including for France.
26:43All right.
26:44Senator Shaheen, would you want to start?
26:47Look, I can't speak to why the vice president gave the speech that he gave.
26:53And I'm in the opposite party, so I don't necessarily have these conversations with
26:59the Trump administration.
27:00But I will say this.
27:02I think it is not a good strategy to attack our allies.
27:09One of the things that is a foundation of our security in the United States, and I think
27:14of the transatlantic alliance, is that we are allies and partners, and that we it's
27:20one of the strengths of NATO, as we've all talked about.
27:23And so I think to attack our allies is not a good strategy, especially when we are under
27:31attack potentially by Russia and Vladimir Putin, when we are in this competition with
27:37China, both economic and military, and when we have nations like Iran that are inciting
27:45terrorists around the world that would attack us in the West, and with North Korea, which
27:52is developing a missile that will soon be able to reach the United States and all over
27:57the world.
27:58So, I think our strength lies in working together, in doing everything we can to support democratic
28:06ideals, and I don't understand a strategy that says we should divide our allies and
28:12partners.
28:18What I like most is that Europe never criticizes Trump.
28:24You need to get Fox.
28:25So the point he's trying to make is that if you were at this conference this weekend,
28:31you thought it was Trump's fault that Ukraine got invaded.
28:36No.
28:37When he was president, they didn't get invaded because Putin scared of Trump.
28:42That's a good thing.
28:44I think what J.D. is trying to tell folks here is that you need to understand Germany
28:49is going to have an election.
28:51There's going to be a pushback in Germany about out-of-control migration, the AFD.
29:01Making them go away is not the answer.
29:03Dealing with their underlying problem is probably the answer.
29:07Brexit.
29:09How did that happen?
29:10Too much.
29:11People feel like too much.
29:15Our society is changing too fast and all the wrong ways.
29:19I think that's something you need to hear from America, and I'm glad he said it.
29:24Now, as to Ukraine, the most important decision we will make as a group is how this war ends.
29:30Do you agree with that?
29:33If we don't get this right, there goes Taiwan.
29:36Question, should Japan be in NATO?
29:39Should South Korea be in NATO?
29:41Think about it.
29:43If we don't get it right, there goes Taiwan.
29:45If we get it right, we can reset and make the world a more stable place.
29:51Trump's the best person I know of to get it right, because Putin's afraid of it.
29:55In 2008, Georgia, 2014, Ukraine, four years of Trump, nothing to Trump.
30:05You didn't start this war, but you got to end it, and you better end it well, because
30:10it will be your legacy.
30:12And here's how to end it well.
30:14Not to humiliate Putin, but to make sure it never happens again.
30:19Integrate our economies.
30:20I urge you to do a mineral agreement with Ukraine so we'll have something of value and
30:26defend so the American people understand why Ukraine's important beyond just an idea.
30:32I'd urge you, Mr. President, in the next decade, sell them all the weapons they need, made
30:36in America, good for us, good for them, to make them so strong nobody in their right
30:40mind would do this again.
30:42I would urge you, Mr. President, if we can't reach consensus on NATO now that we put on
30:47the table, Putin, if you don't want Ukraine in NATO, don't invade them, because if you
30:53invade them, they're going into NATO.
30:55And if President Trump said that, it would be earth-shattering.
31:00So we got a chance here to end this war in a fashion to deter future aggression, because
31:07Xi will get away with as much as he can as long as he can.
31:11And NATO needs to be thinking about what role should we play in Asia, if any.
31:16You've opened up an office.
31:18But I am worried that if we don't get Ukraine right, there goes Taiwan.
31:21I think if we get Ukraine right, that's the biggest thing we could do to help Taiwan of
31:26anything else.
31:27If we spend more now on the mutual defense of NATO nations, that will be seen by Xi as
31:35a warning sign that we're not going to take it anymore.
31:39I'm tired of worrying about being provocative to bad guys.
31:44I want them to fear us.
31:47If you don't fear Donald Trump, you're a little bit crazy.
31:53I agree.
31:56He is watching.
31:57And if we don't play this well, he might try something in the Pacific, which would destabilize
32:02the whole region.
32:03You're totally right.
32:04And we have to get this right.
32:05It has to be a good deal.
32:06To your question, yes, Trump, when he came on board, President Trump in his first term,
32:12he has very much been pushing for the Western Europeans to pay more, and he was successful.
32:17Because after 2014, the Welsh pledge, not a lot happened.
32:20It only started to take up after he became president, and it was a second impetus to
32:24doing more when Ukraine was invaded by Russia.
32:28So he is right that we have to do more, because it is simply not fair if European NATO countries
32:33are paying less for their collective defense than the U.S. is paying for that.
32:37Because the U.S. would also like to lower its taxes, or to spend more on education or
32:41whatever you want to spend it on.
32:44And the argument cannot be that we are so poor here.
32:46We are the richest part of the world.
32:47The money is there.
32:49That cannot be the problem.
32:50It is, of course, difficult decisions you have to take.
32:53But you are right that, of course, you have to do it not only because President Trump
32:57thinks it is fair, but because we have to realize that we have to defend ourselves.
33:02And we cannot defend ourselves in four or five years who would stick to the 2%.
33:06What we now have in NATO is a process in place by which we come to joint conclusions on what
33:12the gaps are in terms of long-range missiles, in terms of our armies, in terms of our air
33:18and missile defense, in terms of our military mobility.
33:21And that will lead you to a number which is much, much more than 2%.
33:25The decision we will take as soon as we have agreed on those targets.
33:29But we are getting there.
33:30I assume we will do that in April, May.
33:32But it will be a number much more than 2%.
33:34And I have needed sometimes personal protection inside the room, if I made that point, with
33:39some of my European colleagues.
33:41But luckily, now two months onwards, I am getting more and more support that is needed
33:45that people see this.
33:47And of course, they are still worried about how to find the money.
33:50And by the way, not only a new number, but also a credible path.
33:54Not just saying we will do it and then nothing happening afterwards.
33:57No, we need a credible path.
33:58And then to the defense industry production again, we have to ramp it up, including getting
34:03the latest innovations, et cetera, in the marketplace.
34:07And to the defense companies, I would say, I know you want 10-year contracts.
34:10That is absolutely impossible in the US system and in many other systems.
34:14But there is so much money floating around.
34:16Get in your extra production lines.
34:18Get in your extra shifts.
34:20And to all of you, I would say, if you have a bank account, or if you have a pension,
34:25go to your bank, go to your pension fund, and tell them there is a small difference
34:28between on the one hand, illicit drugs and pornography, and on the other hand, investments
34:34in defense.
34:35But you still have to tell them that.
34:37So please, help me there.
34:40Great.
34:41I know you, Secretary General, have to go in like one minute.
34:46But let me push you on the path that you just mentioned.
34:50Are you prepared to offer to the audience your own thought on what kind of timeframe
34:57you're looking at?
34:58That has to be done fast.
34:59Let's assume in 2025, we decide on 3, 3.5, whatever percent, by when?
35:06We have to do it fast.
35:07You have a certain issue of absorption, because you have to get the production up, and you
35:12have to find the people.
35:13So probably you can take steps of 0.2, maybe 0.3% a year, but that means that you can't
35:18get there fast.
35:19And it has to be credible, and it will be tracked and traced.
35:23And I will be on the phone, and if you don't listen to me, I'm sure there will be somebody
35:26in Washington, a very nice man, calling you if you are not delivering on your commitment.
35:31Great.
35:32Let's give a round of applause to a great panel.