As of: April 4, 2024, 5:48 a.m
By: Kathrin Braun
Comments
Press
Split
NATO's 75th anniversary is being celebrated in Brussels this week. © Johanna Geron/AFP
NATO is 75 years old – and faces many threats. Military strategist Florence Gaub is looking for ways to achieve peace and stability for the alliance.
Munich – For a long time it seemed as if NATO had already fulfilled its mission: After the end of the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet Union, it was not clear for many years who the “North Atlantic Treaty Organization” was supposed to defend itself against. That changed with Vladimir Putin's war against Ukraine. Today the member states are arming themselves and spending more money on defense. Sweden and Finland have now also joined.
But what exactly is the Western military alliance preparing for? Florence Gaub is research director at the NATO Military Academy in Rome. The Munich native is a futurologist, meaning she develops various conflict scenarios for governments, calculates the probability of events and runs through the possible consequences. On the 75th anniversary of the founding of NATO, she explains what the West could expect in the next few years.
Ms. Gaub, let's look ten years into the future: How will Ukraine fare then?
This is difficult to calculate because there is little data on the Ukraine war - unlike, for example, climate change. We know little about the state of the Russian army, about the motivation of its forces. We could use statistics about the average duration of wars, which would be 15 months - but we're already past that. I can well imagine that the war will be over in 2040. But I don't think it's ending any time soon.
2040? That sounds pretty frightening.
Don't get me wrong: hopefully it should be over by now. My gut feeling tells me that the next three to five years will be tough again. But that's just my assessment. Most people fear a completely different scenario.
Namely?
That Trump will be re-elected in November and say: We no longer support Ukraine. Many people would then expect the war to be over because Ukraine no longer has what it needs - and Russia is destroying everything.
Scenarios for the Ukraine war: It is primarily about deterrence
Could that happen?
There is no reason at all to believe that. First, Ukraine also has supporters other than the United States. And second, conflicts tend to change form rather than simply end abruptly. It is quite possible that without US support, Ukraine would change the way it wages war - for example, with more attacks on Russian territory, assassinations, and car bombs. We also observed this in Vietnam, Afghanistan and Syria.
My news
1500 euros per month - Citizen's benefit recipient emphasizes: "It's just too much money for my standards" read
WhatsApp disruption: Tens of thousands of people cannot use Messenger
Contribution service sends letters to thousands of households - if you don't respond, you risk being fined
“Accumulation of vehicles” spotted: Russia’s army is moving new tanks to Crimea
“That touched a nerve”: Breakfast café has to close shortly after opening – due to too many guests reading
Videos show losses: Russia's tank fleet is lost in the rain of cluster bombs
There is another scenario: NATO ground troops in Ukraine. What would that mean for us?
Let's say Macron sends his troops to Ukraine - that wouldn't immediately drag us into war. For the alliance to take effect, Russia would have to attack French territory or a French ship. However, I learned at the Munich Security Conference that Macron is not the only one toying with the idea. Other Western circles are also considering ground troops in Ukraine as the next level of escalation.
Is that likely?
I can't say that in numbers. But war is also about not letting the other side know what you're up to. Macron wanted to make it clear to Putin: We are very determined not to let Ukraine down - regardless of what the USA does. He was primarily concerned with deterrence. Just like Putin keeps talking about his atomic bomb. That doesn't mean that World War III is coming - but we have to be extremely careful, both diplomatically and militarily, that the whole thing doesn't get out of hand.
Different solutions in the Ukraine war: Both parties should be able to see the agreement as a victory
France threatens escalation while Germany tries not to get too involved. Did you advise the Chancellor to go for Taurus?
No, but I know what the federal government thinks about this: What happens in the long term if the USA withdraws, Ukraine attacks Moscow and Germany suddenly finds itself as a belligerent? Although I assess the danger differently, I respect the opinion of the Chancellery. After all, a good half of the German population still has difficulty with the idea that the peaceful world of yesterday will never come back. Scholz also has to do justice to them.
Are these the Mützenichs of this country? How do you view the freeze debate?
I can certainly imagine that there will be peace negotiations at some point - which will then lead to nothing. Then you sit down at the negotiating table again, and then it crashes again. This can go through several stages. We must understand that war is not a football game that ends with one team winning. A Ukrainian victory will not be achieved when the last Russian soldier leaves Ukrainian territory. That may have been the case in the past at the Battle of Waterloo, where two large armies met, tens of thousands of people died and everything was decided in the evening. How can we imagine a peace solution to this war if Russia has not defined its goal? Is it the takeover of Kiev? Is it the death of Zelensky? Both sides will have to define the end of the war together - and that can only be done through negotiations. They will have to agree on a reform that both Putin and Zelensky can sell as a victory at home. Freezing is probably not one of them.
In a letter to Western governments, Nobel Prize winners warn that 1938 should not be repeated. At that time, Great Britain and France had let Hitler get away with the annexation of the Sudetenland - a year later, Germany attacked Poland. Could history repeat itself?
We know that Putin's intention is not just Ukraine. Many people hope that everything will be as before if Ukraine simply surrenders. But Russia and China make no secret of the fact that the dominance of the Western world should end. That's why the analogy with 1938 is also shared by most NATO member states: If Putin is successful in Ukraine, there will be a conflagration - which could then spread to Georgia, Moldova, Belarus, Poland and the Baltics.
Future of NATO: rapprochement with Russia and China is possible again
In your book you plead for more optimism. How do you explain this to people in the Baltics, for example?
A lot more is happening there than here - both militarily and in the mental preparation of society. The people there have always lived with the threat from Russia. That is why the Baltic countries are continually strengthening their military. This gives people the feeling that they are not completely at the mercy of Russia. I also wish that for Germany: People are afraid of the future when they feel like they can't do anything. The government could prepare its citizens for an emergency: for example by calling for them to stock up on enough water and heating material. That sounds threatening at first, but in the end such measures simply give us control - and therefore optimism.
Is there a chance that, say in 50 years, we will have rapproched Russia and China again?
There is always a chance. We get a good feeling for this when we look at the past 50 years. So many things have happened that you would never have expected before: Here too, we have become closer to Russia and China after the Cold War - at least for a certain time. Let us remember the fall of the Berlin Wall, the Arab Spring, and the fact that the ozone hole simply closed again. You should never assume that everything has already been decided. In 50 years I will be 96 and I hope that we will all have aged much better than our ancestors, because we have made huge progress in science, that we have the worst of climate change under control and that we have found our way back to our original idea from 1945 , when the United Nations was founded because everyone wanted to live in peace with one another. In the end, that's what everyone wants.
Interview: Kathrin Braun