- vor 2 Minuten
Interview mit Mark Rutte: NATO-Modell nicht tragfähig
NATO-Generalsekretär Mark Rutte spricht exklusiv mit Euronews über drängende Probleme des Bündnisses: Abhängigkeit von den USA und Russlands nukleare Drohung. Interview hier.
LESEN SIE MEHR : http://de.euronews.com/2026/10/01/interview-mit-mark-rutte-nato-modell-nicht-tragfahig
Abonnieren Sie! Euronews gibt es in 12 Sprachen.
NATO-Generalsekretär Mark Rutte spricht exklusiv mit Euronews über drängende Probleme des Bündnisses: Abhängigkeit von den USA und Russlands nukleare Drohung. Interview hier.
LESEN SIE MEHR : http://de.euronews.com/2026/10/01/interview-mit-mark-rutte-nato-modell-nicht-tragfahig
Abonnieren Sie! Euronews gibt es in 12 Sprachen.
Kategorie
🗞
NewsTranskript
00:07Let's get straight into it, Secretary General.
00:10Can you confirm that Russia sent a letter to NATO that said
00:15if the Russian Federation, its territory, including Kaliningrad,
00:19comes under any threat, they will resort to the full arsenal,
00:23which includes also nuclear weapons, in a letter.
00:25They use the term nuclear weapons in a letter.
00:27Well, I'm not at liberty to disclose what they sent us,
00:30but this is what they reported more or less to the media.
00:33So let me just refer to what the Russians reported to the media
00:36and leave it at that.
00:37What we did, we reacted.
00:40And basically what we said is, hey, listen, we are a defensive alliance.
00:44And stop the nuclear threats.
00:47This is absolutely not called for and not helpful.
00:52And particularly stop the war in Ukraine,
00:54which is unprovoked war of aggression against Ukraine.
00:56But if you sent a response, it's because they sent you a letter in the first place.
00:59Is there a threat, an escalation that implies the risk of nuclear weapons
01:04being employed against the Baltics is now real?
01:07No, it's not.
01:09Putin knows that he can never win from NATO.
01:13So I don't take this that serious.
01:15But of course, we had to reply and make clear to him
01:17that NATO is a defensive alliance, as I said,
01:19and stop the war in Ukraine and stop the nuclear threats
01:23because it's not helpful.
01:24And NATO is so much stronger than Russia is.
01:27So there's no way they can ever beat us.
01:28There's a lot of frenzy around the situation in the Baltics
01:31and a security scenario that has or seems to have deteriorated over the past three weeks.
01:36What are the scenarios you're preparing for?
01:38Because something seems to have changed beyond language.
01:40Listen, let's zoom out a little bit.
01:42What's happening?
01:4343,000 Russians killed or seriously wounded a month now in Ukraine.
01:48Ukraine holding the front line, doing much better than only a half year or a year ago,
01:52striking deep inside Russia.
01:56Allies supporting Ukraine in terms of weapons delivery, etc.
01:59So this is the picture.
02:01So Putin is not winning this.
02:03So let's assume that he is a bit worried and a bit rattled.
02:07And I think the best way to deal with this is to have a little bit of calm here.
02:13On the NATO side, we can allow a bit of calm,
02:15but also a bit of making sure we continue with what we are doing.
02:19So the carry-on part, which is investing in our defense and we're doing it.
02:23But most important for now is to keep the support for Ukraine going.
02:27What Putin tries to do, don't forget,
02:30by these letters and these hybrid gray zone activities,
02:35is he tries to divide us.
02:36And lose the focus on Ukraine.
02:39We will not.
02:40So every hybrid, whatever happens in Europe,
02:44will be met with more support for Ukraine, not less support for Ukraine.
02:47That's the message.
02:48Calm, carry on, keep the support for Ukraine going.
02:51That's how we deal with this.
02:52We'll talk about Ukraine in a second,
02:53but just to understand this clearly,
02:56because over the past three weeks,
02:58ever since the CIA boss went over to Moscow and that was reported,
03:02there has been this real frenzy around whether or not
03:04something is in the making, could happen not imminently,
03:08but that now moves away from Ukraine into a NATO country.
03:11Is the risk assessment really truly the same it was three weeks,
03:14three months ago, a year ago?
03:15Yes, and let's not forget,
03:17if the Russians want to do something against Finland or one of the Baltic nations
03:22or Poland or whichever country in NATO, we will see a buildup.
03:26And let me, if you don't believe me,
03:28let's listen to the Latvian and Estonian politicians.
03:32They are saying, hey, we will be the first to call you
03:34if we think there is a serious threat against, for example, Estonia or Latvia.
03:38In the meantime, their message is, please stop being so worried.
03:45We have prepared for this, we have planned for this,
03:47and this is true for the whole of NATO.
03:48We will defend every inch of NATO territory,
03:52every square kilometer, square mile.
03:53There's no doubt Putin knows this.
03:56So that threat is not there, and if anything happens,
03:59we are ready to counter it.
04:00You say, if you don't believe me, let's just listen to the Baltic politicians.
04:04They are politicians.
04:05They have to say there is no imminent risk.
04:07It is politics, and it's also damaging the business environment.
04:10But the question, and this is why I want to insist to you,
04:13is because the word of NATO really matters.
04:14Should we just take away from this conversation
04:17that regardless of the letters, the trip of a CIA, top officer or not,
04:22nothing has changed, and even if Russia was planning to do something,
04:26you are prepared for it, and this is NATO territory, will be protected.
04:29There is no imminent threat to NATO territory.
04:33If there is a built-up, we will see it, and we will deal with it.
04:37If anything happens otherwise, we will also deal with it,
04:40because we have prepared and trained for this.
04:41We have a single command structure.
04:43We have 32 allies working together.
04:45Let's talk about Ukraine now.
04:47How do you see things evolving in the next few months?
04:49Is it as bad as it sounds?
04:51No, it's much better.
04:52Do we get to winter in a better shape?
04:53No, it's much better.
04:54The problem, yes, is with the pummeling of cities by the Russians.
04:57That's true.
04:58So they are hitting hard at the infrastructure, critical energy infrastructure, at cities.
05:04So that's taking place.
05:05And there is a lack of interceptors, and that means that the Europeans and the Americans,
05:10we are all working in conjunction to get as much as possible to Ukraine
05:13to make sure that they can defend themselves.
05:16But when it comes to the front line, as I said, look at Donetsk, Slovyansk, Kramatorsk,
05:22these key cities, the Ukrainians are doing much better now than only a half year or a year ago.
05:27Look at what they are doing in striking deep inside Russia
05:30and taking out some of the key logistical systems in Russia
05:34when it comes to the energy infrastructure, when it comes to their systems of warehouses, etc.
05:40How can we accelerate, or how can that process be accelerated?
05:43Because the Ukrainians would say, we want it, and the NATO summit, in theory,
05:48should have brought that to fruition, to get the licenses to be able to do the patriots.
05:52On the licenses, the discussion is going on, but that won't help them in the short term
05:56because it takes quite some time if you have the licenses to build these missiles.
06:01So that's for the U.S. and Ukraine to discuss.
06:04Is that moving along?
06:05Because there's been a lot of contradiction.
06:06The U.S. is moving along, but I'm not involved in that.
06:08We track that, we trace that, but that is particularly between the U.S.,
06:12which has these companies on its territory, which is building the patriot systems.
06:18We know that in Germany, when it comes to PEC-2s,
06:21we now see massive production sites being built between MBDA and Ration to RTX
06:29to build the PEC-2 interceptors in Germany.
06:32So all of this is happening, but this will not help Ukraine in the short term.
06:37For next winter and for next coming weeks and months, they simply need more interceptors.
06:41Please, honor whatever, you can still give them.
06:44It's saving lives.
06:45And also our Supreme Allied Commander is saying to those European countries
06:49still having these patriots' interceptors, whatever you can give, please do,
06:54because it is crucial now to keep Ukraine strong.
06:57You mentioned, certainly when it comes to the Europeans, that if you have any in stock,
07:01you should send them now.
07:02You didn't name the countries, but we've seen clearly in Brussels,
07:04there's been ongoing pressure on Spain and Greece in particular.
07:08Is this now the time to say whatever you have, really send it now?
07:11No, of course.
07:11There is no imminent threat on the southern flag?
07:13That's not how it works, because we have to make sure, of course,
07:15that we have enough also to protect ourselves.
07:17But that's not up to me.
07:18That's the Chief of Defense, the Supreme Allied Commander,
07:21assessing what are the stockpiles we need in NATO territory.
07:24And based on that assessment, what can we still give to Ukraine?
07:27There is still room for that.
07:28How much of a drag is the war in Iran on Ukraine?
07:31Because you could argue they feel collateral damage out of the situation.
07:35is a war that, in theory, as we understood,
07:37the president of the U.S. said over the summer was done.
07:39Clearly, it's not done.
07:40The oil is not coming out.
07:41And now there's also energy pressure feeding into this conversation.
07:43How much of a problem is the war in Iran when it comes to the situation in Ukraine?
07:47But let's also assess, and here we might always, not all of us agree,
07:51that it was only the United States which was capable of taking out
07:55the nuclear capability of Iran, which was a threat, potentially, soon,
07:59not only for Israel in the Middle East, but also for us here.
08:02You really believe that?
08:03In Brussels.
08:03Yeah, absolutely believe that.
08:04Yes, so the American president taking out that threat,
08:08degrading that capability is crucial.
08:10And, of course, everywhere also has its downsides.
08:13Why are the Americans doing it, taking out the Iranians,
08:16Iranian nuclear capability?
08:17Because we can't.
08:19But in the future, we have to make sure that as Europeans,
08:21we can do this ourselves.
08:23The flip side, some would argue, and again,
08:24going back to the knock-on effect on Ukraine,
08:26some would say the war in Iran,
08:28it's not clear how this answer, whether there's a strategy to do it.
08:32And it is having an impact on Ukraine directly because the president of the U.S.
08:37is now saying, do not hit the refineries because I don't want to see oil presses going up.
08:41It is having a knock-on effect.
08:43So how can you undo this, this dynamic?
08:45And I'm not going to comment on everything which is said by...
08:47But do you worry about the ramifications and the energy margin?
08:50Of course, there are always ramifications,
08:52but the ramifications start from a premise that it is good that the Americans did this.
08:55And I'm, one, believing that it was absolutely essential for the Americans to take on Iran.
09:00And do you believe the vast majority of the alliance agrees with your assessment?
09:05No, I don't think so, but that doesn't care.
09:07I don't care.
09:08You asked me on my opinion.
09:10To that point, at this stage, do you see a NATO that is together in its collective decision-making?
09:17Or actually, you would argue, there are real tensions because the interests are moving in different ways?
09:22No, we are talking about Iran, but Iran last time...
09:25You're saying two points of tension.
09:26There are both...
09:26Oh, no, no, Iran is outside NATO territory.
09:28So let's be honest, NATO is focused on the Euro-Atlantic.
09:31And when it comes to the Euro-Atlantic and defending ourselves against Russia,
09:34which is our long-term threat, we are totally on one page.
09:38The US, Canada, the 30 NATO allies in Europe, there's no problem.
09:42No, we were discussing Iran, and hey, you're allowed to have your differences of opinion when it comes to Iran.
09:47By the way, the Europeans are also totally in agreement that the freedom of navigation has to be restored,
09:54both in the Strait of Hormuz and in the Red Sea.
09:57And we see now increasingly European countries being active there.
10:00Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia helping out with demining in the Strait of Hormuz.
10:06This is even before this so-called permissive environment will emerge, hopefully, in the future.
10:12So already they are there.
10:13Some other European countries are active there more discreetly, helping out with demining.
10:18Why? Because the US is great, but the US lacks two capabilities.
10:22One is icebreakers. You don't need them in the Strait of Hormuz.
10:25And demining capacity, which the Europeans have an ample supply.
10:29So it's very good that Europeans are more and more helping.
10:32And also 5,000 American planes took off from European bases since the end of February in support of Epic
10:39Fury.
10:39So again, Europe being one big power protection platform for the United States.
10:44So you're saying, because publicly, let's be honest, the war is not popular in Europe.
10:48We've seen a number of European leaders who come out of it very openly, saying it was a bad idea.
10:53And my population doesn't support it.
10:54Would you say there's an element of performative, well, they're just politicians.
10:59There's an element of I disagree, but actually I'm providing much more support than I say in public.
11:04No, no, I take all those comments very seriously.
11:05But what I'm telling you is that the nuclear capability of Iran, in my assessment, is a direct threat, not
11:11only to the Middle East, but also to Europe.
11:13That it was only the United States which was able to degrade it.
11:16How is the atmosphere in the alliance at this point?
11:19It's great. It's the best it has ever been.
11:21Because you have now a Europe which is taking responsibility for its own defense.
11:26President Trump loves NATO.
11:28He only hated one element, which was the fact that we were not spending enough.
11:32And multiple other things. He also said he had been at the NATO summit.
11:35He was not very happy going into the NATO summit, then came out happy out of it.
11:39But he said he was not happy at his NATO summits and his NATO allies because of Iran.
11:43When I speak with President Trump, he's totally clear-eyed why NATO is crucial also for the United States.
11:49Jonas Sture, the Norwegian Prime Minister, showing him the map of these nuclear submarines of Russia, which are a threat
11:56not to Norway.
11:57They are a threat to the United States.
11:59They might end up at the shores of the United States if we as NATO would not block them.
12:04So NATO, and this is just one example, is not only there to protect Europe.
12:08It is also there to protect Canada.
12:10It's there to protect the United States.
12:12And finally, in the U.S., in all the senior circles, in the Pentagon, in the state and in the
12:18White House,
12:18there is a widespread agreement that if China would move against the first island chain,
12:24that there is no doubt that at the same moment Putin will keep us busy here.
12:28And then we need a stronger European element in NATO.
12:32This is NATO 3.0, a stronger Europe and a stronger NATO, to make sure that the U.S.
12:37doesn't have to spread its resources too thinly.
12:40And just a final point on this, the reason why I ask how is the mood is because right now
12:44we see competing priorities.
12:46The U.S. is sending this message, do not hit the refineries because it's affecting the energy market.
12:50What I detect from the European leadership is that they are okay with Ukraine hitting deeply into Russia
12:55because that is the moneymaker for Russia.
12:58As a NATO Secretary General, when you look at both scenarios, do you say,
13:01at this point I'd rather they continue just hitting Russia deeply, even if it comes with ramifications in the energy
13:07market?
13:07I look at another scenario.
13:08It's the best balance.
13:09I look at another fact.
13:10And the fact is that when it comes to the war in Ukraine, there is only one person who can
13:13bring it to an end.
13:14And that person is not living in Europe.
13:16That person is living in the White House.
13:18And the American president is the only one.
13:19You really believe that?
13:20Yes, I really believe this.
13:21He was the only one who could break the deadlock with Putin.
13:23He did.
13:24He started a dialogue.
13:24He sent some of his senior advisors to work diligently with the Russians and the Ukrainians to bring this war
13:32to an end.
13:32So far it has not been successful, but they are working on this.
13:35I commend them for that.
13:36But I want to ask you, the ceasefire he promised did not happen.
13:39The energy ceasefire is not happening either.
13:41In your mind, is there really now any path in which we see from now until the winter,
13:45any sort of mediated ceasefire of any way, or actually this is just war?
13:49Of course, we all hope for it.
13:51I know that the whole European leadership is behind this effort because we all want this war to end.
13:58But, hey, you need two to tango.
14:00So far it doesn't seem that Vladimir, Vladimir is Putin, is willing to tango when it comes to a peace
14:07deal.
14:07And as long as he is not making himself available for that, it is a bit difficult.
14:11But, hey, we always know that these wars end with a peace deal.
14:14And we always know you need negotiators and you need somebody with clout who can do that.
14:19And the American president breaking the deadlock with Putin when he came into office I think was essential.
14:26And we can then criticize that it has not been done.
14:29No.
14:29I mean, this is very difficult.
14:30It takes time.
14:31But over time, I'm sure that will be successful.
14:33I don't know whether it will be before winter.
14:35At the moment, we don't see Putin willing, it seems, to engage.
14:39When you look at NATO, you also accomplish the 5%.
14:42And then, of course, there's the famous Trump trillion.
14:45Some dispute that it's an effective trillion.
14:47But the president does say we will get to the 1 trillion.
14:50But there are differences in terms of what do we buy.
14:53And the European industry would say there needs to be a clear European preference.
14:57In your mind, do you go as long as you pay and you're a NATO member, you buy what you
15:02want?
15:02First of all, it's more than 1 trillion.
15:04But then on the question you ask, the problem is not, is it, do you buy in Europe or do
15:11you buy in the United States?
15:12The problem is, can you buy?
15:14The money is there.
15:15But the defense industrial base in Europe is underdeveloped.
15:19It is not producing enough.
15:20Too many factories are still not working full time, are not churning out their products 24-7.
15:25But there is no bias for a manufacturer in Europe.
15:28No, no, the same is true for the United States.
15:29Also, the United States needs to ramp up its output.
15:32This is exactly what Trump tries to do.
15:33It's the quadrupling of the five big primes in the U.S., et cetera.
15:37So the problem is not, if only we had the luxury of this discussing buy European or buy American.
15:42No, I would say buy.
15:44And generally speaking, being a free market politician, I think it's always better if you have these free markets functioning
15:52as open and independent as possible.
15:56But at the moment, I think it is a discussion of luxury whether you buy European or American, because we
16:01cannot buy on both sides.
16:02There is not enough production, not in Europe, not in the United States, to fulfill all the demand signals now.
16:08So this is my message to industry.
16:10Invest.
16:11You know there is a long-term demand.
16:13There is a long-term commitment to spend so much more.
16:15What the good news is, industry is ramping up, and we had that in Ankara, with the 50 billion extra
16:21defense industrial contracts being closed there,
16:26and the 40 billion when it comes to the drone edge.
16:28So these were huge announcements, which will also help to accelerate the investments in the defense industrial base.
16:35So Maine in Europe is a Brussels debate.
16:37It exists in the Brussels circles.
16:38If only we have the luxury to have that debate.
16:41At the moment, the problem is we do not produce enough.
16:43I would say, more generally speaking, let's look at this as one big transatlantic defense industrial market.
16:49And there is enough money for everybody.
16:52And there will be a defense dividend coming from this, because all these investments will also lead to societal returns,
17:00not only in the defense output from the defense industrial base, but also innovation and everything else.
17:05And, Secretary General, just a final question.
17:08What do you think NATO 3.0 means?
17:11Because I see two different schools.
17:13One says it means an alliance in which we pay.
17:16We both commit.
17:16So it will equalize the relationship.
17:19It will be stronger because we will commit more.
17:21There are some in Europe who would say, ultimately, NATO 3.0 means they will pull back the troops.
17:26We will have to pay more.
17:28We will have to pay for their weapons.
17:29And in exchange, what we get is the nuclear umbrella.
17:32That is it.
17:33That is NATO 3.0.
17:35Which one is it?
17:36Well, it's more like the first than the second, but let me be more precise.
17:39It's too negative, the second one.
17:40Yes.
17:40I mean, it's a bit of a crazy assumption that it will be the second one.
17:43You don't mean this.
17:44Because if the U.S.
17:46What do we think?
17:46No, but if the U.S. would only be here with the nuclear umbrella, of course, from a strategic
17:50and technical point of view, that would not be very wise.
17:53Because you want also to be there then, if you have a nuclear umbrella, in a conventional
17:57sense.
17:57For all kinds of tactical, strategic reasons, the military people can explain to you why
18:01that is important.
18:02So the U.S. will stay involved in Europe, also in the conventional domain.
18:07No, the problem was that NATO was not sustainable.
18:09It is not sustainable that you have a country, the United States, being overly responsible
18:14for the defense of 600 million Europeans.
18:16We are the richest part of the world.
18:18There is no part of the world which is richer than Europe.
18:21And then we are totally over-dependent on a country so far away, 340 million people to
18:27defend against 140 million Russians.
18:29That's not sustainable.
18:30That's what we are changing now.
18:32That means that, and this is the paradox, the United States, thanks to the fact that
18:36Europe is stepping up, will be much more committed to Europe.
18:39Because they need Europe and a secure Atlantic and a secure Arctic.
18:43Look at the Greenland debate we were able to bring to a successful outcome last week,
18:48the Danes and the Greenlanders and the Americans, very successfully.
18:52A case in point that we need a secure Arctic, secure Atlantic, secure Europe to keep Europe,
18:57the Arctic and the United States safe.
18:59Just as a final question, would you say ultimately all of this is chit-chat because the big problem
19:03in Europe will be China?
19:05No, China is extremely relevant.
19:07And as I said, if something happens in China would move against Taiwan or somewhere else
19:12in the first island chain, that will have a huge impact on Europe and the U.S.
19:15On the U.S., first of all, because they will try to do everything to stabilize the situation
19:19in the Pacific.
19:20But the way, they will need Europe to take indeed responsibility much more than we do at this
19:26moment for our own defense.
19:27Because you cannot require from the U.S. to spread its resources too thinly.
19:33And yes, of course, China is extremely relevant.
19:36And we assess that for the moment Russia is the long-term threat against NATO.
19:40We will see how China develops.
19:42We know they are sitting by 2030 on 1,000 nuclear warheads.
19:46They have massive investments in their military, and it's not only to organize parades in Beijing.
19:50Well, on that note, Secretary General, thank you very much for joining us.
19:54Thank you very much.
19:55Thank you.
19:55Thank you.