Europe Today: Interview to Fabrice Pothier and the Munich Security Conference

euronews (in English)

Europe Today: Interview to Fabrice Pothier and the Munich Security Conference  Tune in to Euronews' new flagship morning programme at 8 am Brussels time. In just 20 minutes, we bring you up to speed on the biggest news of the day.  READ MORE : http://www.euronews.com/2026/02/16/europe-today-interview-to-fabrice-pothier-and-the-munich-security-conference  Subscribe to our channel. Euronews is available on Dailymotion in 12 languages

Transcript

00:14Good morning. It's Monday, the 16th of February. I'm Maret Gwynn, and this is Europe Today,

00:21your daily dose of European news and analysis live here on Euronews.

00:26Coming up, the US calls on Europe to save the West, but Europeans are not convinced.

00:34In his landmark speech at the Munich Security Conference over the weekend, the US Secretary

00:38of State, Marco Rubio, said that the US and Europe are intertwined, but alignment is necessary

00:45from the economy to culture. Meanwhile, Rubio is set to meet Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor

00:51Orbán in Budapest later today after meeting Slovakia's Robert Fizzo on Sunday. Now to

00:58debrief that speech and more from the Munich Security Conference. I'm joined by our EU

01:03editor, Maria Tareo, who's just back from Munich for us. Good morning, Maria.

01:07Great to see you.

01:07It seems like the initial reaction to this Rubio speech was a sense of relief, but was there

01:13relief in Munich?

01:15Look, I think that's a great observation. It really captures the spirit of the past three

01:19days. Yes, that speech was more polite. It was certainly more diplomatic. There was this

01:25fundamental message of we share a history and the destinies are intertwined both the United

01:32States and the Europe and the European Union to some extent. But then he also suggested there

01:39needs to be this form of alignment that goes from the economy to trade, cultural, even

01:44spiritually. So yes, America can work with Europe, but it's a version of Europe that needs to be in

01:50alignment with the views of the US to a large degree. With officials that I spoke, they said,

01:55look, there was relief because compared to last year, J.D. Vance, that was a wrecking ball. This year

02:00was much polite to that extent. But the structure that we've seen before from the US government,

02:06that US National Security Review, which talked about civilizational erasure, all of those points

02:11from saying we're in a sort of climate cult, the idea of wokeness, mass migration. This is not a

02:17minor issue. Marco Rubio told Marco, well, the Munich Security Conference, all of that was present

02:21there. At the same time, then you had the Europeans. Emmanuel Macron talked about this idea of a Europe

02:27that has been vilified and caricatured. The Chancellor, Mertz, who said at this point, the leadership of the

02:33US is being contested. It is not clear that the US will lead the world. And then, of course,

02:39Kayakalas, I was at a panel with her. I should note, Kayakalas had a bit of a revival over the

02:44weekend because she was pushing back. She was really the voice that said, there's a number of

02:48things that we cannot agree. It's important that our destinies are intertwined, sure, but there are

02:52things we clearly don't see eye to eye. So she was very vocal to that extent. And there was a

02:57moment

02:58also in this panel, which hopefully we can put up on the screen. And I want to read

03:01to you. This was to, obviously, questions that we put about the sense of relief and the response to

03:07Marco Rubio's speech. And she said, contrary to what some may say, this woke, decadent Europe is

03:13not facing civilizational erasure. In fact, people still want to join our club and the waiting list

03:18is long. Meredith took three months for a European voice to finally say there is no civilizational

03:25erasure in Europe. One of the quotes that I get and one of the senses that I get from this

03:30conference,

03:31this is really the takeaway that I get from it, is that there are two competing versions now of

03:35the West. Who leads it, what the values of this West are, and also who's going to be the face

03:40of it. And at this point, I'm not really sure that they are fully aligned.

03:44Briefly, Maria, on Zelensky, he was there. Ukraine had a big delegation at Munich.

03:48What did he achieve?

03:49Look, what did he achieve? This was a difficult Munich security conference for President Zelensky

03:53because, again, Ukraine, perhaps because of this confusion and commotion around

03:57the US and Europe was not as dominant. And I've been to every edition as the past three years.

04:03He did say, however, we want to get the ceasefire, but it needs to happen before even

04:08we can go into serious negotiations. We need to see this form of ceasefire. And he also said,

04:13before we commit to a peace plan, we need to get those security guarantees.

04:16There was a question I put to him about EU membership. And he also said, we have to be

04:21technically ready by 2027, because that is also a security guarantee. Let's take a look.

04:26Our membership in EU is the short part of security guarantees. So, we need it. This is the package

04:35for us. One doesn't work with another, because it's economical security guarantees. We don't

04:41respect the United States and Europe. But if we will not have the date in the document, I think

04:47that Russia will block our membership in future. And it will be the problem for all of us, because

04:52what they will do is they will use some other countries or by themselves, because they don't

04:57want us to be in the EU.

04:59And that was, of course, a Ukrainian president. Two things are obvious at this point. One is

05:05they really want the state. They want to get it in a peace settlement. And the European Union

05:09is going to have to get very creative to this. But the two are increasingly intertwined.

05:14The peace deal and the state, they have become now one.

05:17Maria, thank you so much for bringing us up to speed on everything from the Munich

05:20Security Conference. And to discuss all of this further, I'm glad to say we're joined

05:25now by Fabrice Poitier, the CEO of Rasmussen Global, who previously also served as Director

05:31of Policy Planning for the NATO Alliance. Sir, welcome. It's great to have you on the show

05:35this morning.

05:36Now, I'd like to get your take first on Rubio's Munich speech. Were you reassured when he spoke

05:42of an intertwined destiny for the US and Europe? Or does Europe still need to realize it cannot

05:47do it alone and needs a plan B for its security?

05:52I would say it's probably both. There was clearly a feeling of calm before the next tempest,

05:59where obviously Rubio cast a tone that was much more friendly than the previous US speaker

06:07at the previous MSC, J.D. Vance, who really kind of opened almost hostility against Europe.

06:15However, I think nobody was naive in thinking that this is not an olive branch. This is just

06:21a way to make the past few months a bit less painful. But clearly the roller ahead, as I

06:29mentioned, this is camp before the next tempest, because the roller ahead is still made of many

06:34differences. I think Ukraine is still lurking very much around the corner in terms of big

06:40US-Europe-Ukraine difference. And Greenland is not completely, in a way, solved. And I think the

06:46Danish prime minister was pretty clear about that.

06:49And do you think Greenland could be the next storm? Because we heard from Mette Fridriksen,

06:53the Danish prime minister, over the weekend suggesting Donald Trump is still very serious about buying

06:58the island. Do you agree with her that there's still a big risk there for the NATO alliance?

07:04But clearly, the problem is there's a mismatch between what the Danes, the Europeans are trying

07:10to do, which is to improve support to Greenland, both on the security and the economic front, which

07:16is a rational way of addressing possible vulnerabilities out there. And the US president

07:24is not to just take a very emotional, personal view, that he just wants to own that piece of

07:29estate. He's thinking like Manhattan real estate moguls. So he doesn't take a very rational approach

07:37to it. And that's the mismatch that I think the Danes are trying to manage with a diplomatic

07:43process. How long the diplomatic process is going to keep things together? This is the big

07:48question mark. I think we have to be ready for the next crisis. And clearly, the show of unity,

07:53by the Europeans in addressing the US threat on Greenland worked once and may have to work another

08:00time, but we'll have to be willing to put even more skin in this game. You obviously shaped NATO

08:06policy for many years. Do you think there's a real crisis within the HQ here in Brussels? You know,

08:12we heard EU leaders von der Leyen talking about reactivating the EU's own defence clause over the

08:18weekend, seemingly because they cannot rely on NATO's Article 5. Is the NATO alliance,

08:23as we've known it for decades, now dead? It's gone.

08:26Well, I think it's not reactivating the EU mutual defence clause. It's making it real as a start,

08:33because it's never been taken really seriously. But on your NATO question, I think we are entering

08:39the age of parallel universes, where NATO is still going to be there. It's still a very much a valid

08:46option for the Europeans, both in terms of US extended nuclear deterrent, but also in terms of

08:52framework to plan and prevent the next war against Russia. However, clearly, what you hear in the

08:59corridors, but also in the main hallway, is that we need to start thinking about Plan Bs. And for that,

09:06you're going to have the European Union, but you're also going to have increasingly the development of

09:12coalitions, like the coalition of the willing for Ukraine, which maybe is going to be put with more

09:17substance, or the joint expeditionary force that is led by the UK. So I think you're going to have

09:23the multiplication of all these Plan Bs in response to the fact that, answering your question, I think

09:29the US has introduced a very significant doubt as to its commitment to Europe via NATO. And therefore,

09:36NATO is still going to go on, but it's no longer the one and only Plan A.

09:41Fabrice Potier, that's all we have time for this morning. But thank you so much for coming on

09:45and joining us and sharing your insights. Now, as we mentioned there, the president of the European

09:51Commission said in Munich over the weekend that the EU needs to bring its own mutual defence clause

09:57to life, saying, you change or you die. Our reporter, Jakob Yanis, has been scouring through

10:03the EU treaties in search of this little-known mutual defence clause.

10:10Did you know the EU has its own mutual defence clause? Your reporter didn't. But suddenly,

10:16it is the hottest topic in Europe. Just days ago, the head of NATO told Europe to keep dreaming

10:23if they think they can defend themselves without the US. But the EU Commission president fired

10:29back. Independent Europe just means let's develop our strength without constantly leaning on someone

10:35else. And part of her plan involves a little-known rule, the Article 42.7. So, what is it?

10:44It says if an EU country is attacked, all their members have an obligation to help. And on paper,

10:51the wording seems to be stronger than NATO's famous Article 5. It doesn't even require a unanimous vote

10:58to activate. But there is a catch. The EU is not a military alliance, and it lacks a unified command

11:06structure. And it leaves it up to each country to decide how to help, which does not automatically mean

11:13sending troops. And in fact, it has only been triggered once, after the 2015 Paris attacks.

11:20Plus, there is a trust gap. When Eastern European nations look for a true security shield, they look to NATO,

11:28not Brussels. But with Washington demanding Europe to take over its own conventional defence, and with growing

11:36doubts around the future of NATO, the clock is ticking. The EU is also wondering what happens if the US

11:45closes

11:45its nuclear umbrella over Europe. And building a fully independent European nuclear shield would cost

11:52billions of euros and take time. So, Europe has the Treaty and the Article. Now it just must build the

12:00military strength to back it up.

12:07Jakob Yanis reporting there. Now, as we just heard, European leaders are reigniting the debate on a common

12:14European nuclear umbrella amid the continued threats from Russia and eroding trust in the US. Joining me in

12:22the studio to explain more is our defence reporter, Alice Tidy, also freshly back from Munich for us.

12:29Good morning.

12:29Alice, lots of Europeans talking about this over the weekend, the need for a common homegrown

12:35European nuclear deterrence. Why now?

12:39Well, basically, the Europeans, although they've gone to great lengths over the past week to say that

12:45they believe that the US is fully committed to NATO, that they believe it is committed today, tomorrow,

12:49that it will be in 10 years, that it will be in 20 years. There are still a lot of

12:53concerns over

12:54that commitment. I mean, remember that last year, Washington cast doubt over its commitment to Article

13:005. So, Europeans responded by more than doubling their spending target within the alliance. And yet,

13:05this year, we had Trump saying that he would forcefully seize Greenland. So, that cast a lot of

13:11doubts over the very existence of NATO. And obviously, the US has also said that he wants to pull back,

13:16but there's a lot of unsaid yet over how that partial pullback would happen and whether or not

13:22this could include the nuclear deterrent, right? So, over the weekend, indeed, we had French President

13:27Emmanuel Macron announcing that he had held strategic dialogue with Chancellor Mertz on this topic,

13:34as well as with other EU leaders. He didn't name those other EU leaders, but we know, for instance,

13:40that the Latvian PM, Evike Selina, said that she would be open to that discussion. We also had the

13:48Polish President yesterday telling Polish media that he wants his armed forces to look into the

13:55nuclear potential. And I also spoke with the Finnish Defense Minister, Antti Hakkinen, on the sidelines of

14:02the conference, who said, and I quote here, inside NATO, it's clear that the US is ironclad committed

14:08to nuclear deterrence. It's good news if the European nuclear states are investing to build up

14:14even stronger nuclear capabilities. But to compensate the US, that's not the question now. So, Finland would

14:20be open. But again, this European deterrent would have to complement the US and not compensate it.

14:27So, it's clearly an idea of gaining traction among European leaders. But at the same time,

14:32Alice, it's still very, very divisive, this question of nuclear rearmament. And we heard

14:37from the Spanish Prime Minister, Pedro Sánchez, clearly voicing some reservations about this.

14:43Yes, he did. Sánchez was at the Munich conference and he made it clear he is not for nuclear

14:48rearmament. In fact, he said that the nuclear deterrence is far too costly, far too risky,

14:56far too risky, a way of avoiding conflict. And he said that what it involves, the risks it involves,

15:01are actually more of a gamble than a guarantee for European security.

15:05Mm, clearly still some divided opinions on that subject. But thank you so much

15:09for bringing us that update. Moving on now to something completely different. The Berlin Film

15:14Festival has only been running for a few days, yet already there is significant controversy over

15:20comments made by members of the jury. To explain, we can cross over now to Berlin,

15:25where our correspondent Laura Fleischmann is standing by for us, I believe. Laura,

15:30good morning. Bring us up to speed. What has been happening here?

15:37Well, at first, everything seemed to go smoothly at the Berlinale. But then a German journalist asked a

15:43question at a press conference with a jury of the festival. He accused them of what he called

15:49selective solidarity only with Iranians and Ukrainians, but not with Palestinians. And one of

15:56the festival's jurors then responded that there are many conflicts going on worldwide that don't get

16:02any attention at the festival either. But what really sparked controversy was the response by Wim Wenders.

16:08Wim Wenders. He is the president of the jury and a very famous German filmmaker. He said that the

16:13festival is a counterweight to politics. And this even led an Indian writer to pull out from the festival

16:20altogether. But let's hear what Wim Wenders actually said at the press conference.

16:25We have to stay out of politics because if we made movies that are dedicatedly political,

16:37we enter the field of politics, but we are the counterweight to politics. We are the opposite of

16:43politics. We have to do the work of people and not the work of politicians.

16:48Yes. And Laura, it's also true to say that these film festivals, including the Berlinale,

16:55are usually highly political, very politically charged. Why the sudden change in tone here?

17:04Indeed, the Berlinale is known as a highly political film festival, and it still is.

17:09There are many political statements being made on the red carpet at press conferences. But the

17:15change in tone could be due to Germany's history, especially in regards to the Holocaust and into

17:21in regards to World War Two. Israel is a highly sensitive topic here in Germany. And this could be the

17:26reason why Wim Wenders is hesitant in regards to Palestine and in politics in general. But it could

17:33also be due to anti-Semitism being linked to some pro-Palestinian protests here in Germany.

17:39There are anti-Jewish chants. There are anti-Jewish and anti-Israel signs at some protests

17:44that aren't against the government, but against the whole country's existence.

17:48So this could be a reason why movie makers and actors don't want to be linked to this topic,

17:54perhaps. And also, there has been a spike in anti-Semitism as of recently here in Germany.

18:00And the festival's director, Trisha Tuttle, even came out and supported Wim Wenders after the

18:05controversy. She said that it is, as of recently, oftentimes expected of movie makers and actors to

18:11make political statements. But they are mainly at the film festival to promote their work, their

18:17movies. They want to talk about what they did. They don't want to talk about politics,

18:21perhaps. And it is their right of free speech to talk about whatever they please. They can decide

18:27to not talk about politics, but they can also decide to talk about them. But they get criticized

18:33either way. That's what Trisha Tuttle said after the controversy broke loose. Laura, thank you so much

18:40for that update on the controversy surrounding the Berlinale Film Festival in Berlin. But that's it

18:46from us for today. We'll be back at the same time, same place tomorrow. In the meantime,

18:52if you want to read more about the stories we covered on today's show and all the other breaking

18:56news from Europe, remember to stay up to date on our website, euronews.com. Thank you so much

19:03for tuning in. And we hope to see you soon here on Euronews.

19:07Euronews.

19:10Euronews.

19:12Euronews.

19:16Euronews.

19:17Euronews.

Category

Transcript

Comments

Recommended