- 3 ore fa
NATO, il capo dell'alleanza Rutte a Euronews: "Il modello non è sostenibile"
Il segretario generale della NATO Mark Rutte ha parlato in esclusiva con Euronews delle sfide più urgenti per l’alleanza, dalla dipendenza dagli USA alla minaccia nucleare russa. Guarda qui l’intervista.
ALTRE INFORMAZIONI : http://it.euronews.com/2026/10/01/nato-il-capo-dellalleanza-rutte-a-euronews-il-modello-non-e-sostenibile
Abbonati, euronews è disponibile in 12 lingue.
Il segretario generale della NATO Mark Rutte ha parlato in esclusiva con Euronews delle sfide più urgenti per l’alleanza, dalla dipendenza dagli USA alla minaccia nucleare russa. Guarda qui l’intervista.
ALTRE INFORMAZIONI : http://it.euronews.com/2026/10/01/nato-il-capo-dellalleanza-rutte-a-euronews-il-modello-non-e-sostenibile
Abbonati, euronews è disponibile in 12 lingue.
Categoria
🗞
NovitàTrascrizione
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 comes under any threat
00:20they will resort to the full arsenal which 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, but this is what they reported
00:31more or less to the media.
00:33So let me just refer to what the Russians reported to the media and 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, which 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 being employed
01:04against the Baltics is now real?
01:07No, it's not.
01:09Putin knows that he can never win from NATO.
01:12So I don't take this that serious.
01:15But of course, we had to reply and make clear to him that NATO is a defensive alliance,
01:19as I said, and stop the war in Ukraine and stop the nuclear threats because 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 and a security scenario that has
01:33or 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.
01:55Allies 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, but also a bit of making sure we continue
02:18with 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, by these letters and these hybrids, gray zone activities,
02:35is he tries to divide us and lose the focus on Ukraine.
02:39We will not.
02:40So every hybrid, whatever happens in Europe, will be met with more support for Ukraine,
02:46not 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, but just to understand this clearly,
02:56because over the past three weeks, ever since the CIA boss went over to Moscow and that was reported,
03:02there has been this real frenzy around whether or not something is in the making,
03:06could happen not imminently, but that now moves away from Ukraine into a NATO country.
03:11Is the risk assessment really truly the same it was three weeks, three months ago, a year ago?
03:15Yes, and let's not forget, if 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, let's listen to the Latvian and Estonian politicians.
03:32They are saying, hey, we will be the first to call you if we think there is a serious threat
03:36against,
03:37for example, Estonia or Latvia.
03:38But they have to say it.
03:40Their message is, please stop being so worried.
03:45We have prepared for this.
03:46We have planned for this.
03:47And this is true for the whole of NATO.
03:48We will defend every inch of NATO territory, every square kilometer, square mile.
03:53There's no doubt.
03:54Putin knows this.
03:56So that threat is not there.
03:57And if anything happens, we 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, is because the word of NATO really
04:14matters.
04:14Should we just take away from this conversation that regardless of the letters, the trip of a CIA, top officer
04:21or not,
04:22nothing has changed.
04:24And even if Russia was planning to do something, you are prepared for it.
04:27And this is NATO territory.
04:28We'll be protected.
04:29There is no imminent threat to NATO territory.
04:33If there is a buildup, we will see it and we will deal with it.
04:37And if 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.
04:53The 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.
05:08And that means that the Europeans and the Americans, we are all working on junction to get as much as
05:12possible 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, these key cities.
05:23The 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 and taking out some of the key logistical systems
05:34in Russia
05:34when it comes to the energy infrastructure, when it comes to their systems of warehouses, et cetera.
05:41How 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, should have brought that to fruition
05:49to get the licenses to be able to do the patriots.
05:52On the licenses, the discussion is going on.
05:55But that won't help them in the short term because it takes quite some time if you have the licenses
05:59to 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 conservation.
06:06I think that's moving along, but I'm not involved in that.
06:08We track that.
06:09We trace that.
06:10But that is particularly between the U.S., which has these companies on its territory, which is building the patriot
06:17systems.
06:18We know that in Germany, when it comes to PEC-2s, we now see massive production sites being built between
06:27MBDA and Ration to RTX
06:29to build the PEC-2 interceptors in Germany.
06:32So all of this is happening.
06:34But 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 still having these patriots' interceptors,
06:52whatever you can give, please do, because 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, you should send them
07:01now.
07:02You didn't name the countries, but we've seen clearly in Brussels there's been ongoing pressure on Spain and Greece in
07:07particular.
07:08Is this now the time to say whatever you have really to send it now?
07:39No, of course, that's not how it works.
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?
07:47Yeah, but let's also assess, and here we might always, not all of us agree, that it was only the
07:52United States which was capable of taking out the nuclear capability of Iran,
07:57which was a threat potentially soon, not only for Israel in the Middle East, but also for us here.
08:02You really believe that?
08:03In Brussels.
08:03You absolutely believe that, yes.
08:05So the American president taking out that threat, degrading that capability is crucial.
08:10And of course, everywhere also has its downsides.
08:13Why are the Americans doing it, taking out the Iranians, Iranian nuclear capability?
08:17Because we can't.
08:18But in the future, we have to make sure that as Europeans, we can do this ourselves.
08:23The flip side, some would argue, and again, going back to the knock-on effect on Ukraine, some would say
08:27the war in Iran,
08:29it'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. is now saying,
08:38do not hit the refineries, because I don't want to see oil prices going up.
08:41It is having a knock-on effect.
08:43So how can you undo this, this dynamic?
08:45I'm not going to comment on everything which is said by...
08:47But do you worry about the ramifications and the energy market?
08:50Of course, there are always ramifications, but the ramifications start from a premise that it is good that the Americans
08:55did 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, which is our long-term threat, we
09:36are 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, both
09:54in 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?
10:19Because the US is great, but the US lacks two capabilities.
10:22One is icebreakers.
10:23You 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 that, 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.
11:20It's the best it has ever been, because you have now a Europe which is taking responsibility for its own
11:25defense.
11:26President Trump loves NATO.
11:27So he only hated one element, which was the fact that we were not spending enough.
11:32And multiple other things.
11:33He 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.
12:03So NATO, and this is just one example, is not only there to protect Europe, it is also there to
12:09protect Canada, it'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, there is widespread agreement that if China would move against the first island chain, that there is no
12:24doubt 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. doesn't
12:38have 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 because that
12:56is the moneymaker for Russia.
12:57As a NATO Secretary General, when you look at both scenarios, do you say, at this point, I'd rather they
13:03continue just hitting Russia deeply, even if it comes with ramifications in the energy market?
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, and 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, any sort
13:45of 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, which 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.
14:17And 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.
14:44Some dispute that it's an effective trillion, but 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?
15:03First 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?
15:14Okay, the money is there, but 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.
15:26But 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.
15:36So the problem is not, if only we had the luxury of this discussing buy European or buy American.
15:42No, I would say buy.
15:42And 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.
16:15The good news is industry is ramping up.
16:18And we had that in Ankara with the 50 billion extra defense industrial contracts being closed there and the 40
16:26billion 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 piece, a defense dividend coming from this, because all these investments will also lead to
16:59societal 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.
17:34Which one is it?
17:36Well, it's more like the first than the second.
17:38But 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.
17:47Would only be here with the nuclear umbrella, of course, from a strategic and technical point
17:51of 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.
18:03will stay involved in Europe, also in the conventional domain.
18:07No.
18:07The problem was that NATO was not sustainable.
18:10It is not sustainable that you have a country in 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
18:37Europe 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 the Europe will be China?
19:06No, China is extremely relevant.
19:07And as I said, if something happens in China would move against Taiwan or somewhere else in
19:12the 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, but they will need Europe to take indeed responsibility much more than
19:25we do at this moment 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.
19:42As we know, they are sitting by 2030 on 1,000 nuclear warheads.
19:46They have massive investments in their military.
19:48And 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.