05:41And what is going on?
05:48And what is going on?
05:55What is going on?
06:05What is going on?
06:09What is going on?
06:11What is going on?
06:34And what is going on?
06:44And what is going on?
06:58And what is going on?
07:18And what is going on?
08:45I was listening also to
08:46I don't want to repeat
08:48I'm not advocate of Putin
08:51And Lavrov at all
08:53At all
08:54But he warned a month ago
08:57I guess that
08:58If there is a war
09:00Between Europe and Russia
09:03This war will be totally different
09:06And very short
09:07That was the warning
09:09This is a threat
09:10I don't accept this type of speaking
09:13but they speak this
09:14So you condemn it, you condemn that statement
09:16You want to listen to this
09:17No, I just wonder, when you hear that statement, what would you say?
09:20You say, I don't accept this
09:21I say that
09:22You're condemning those statements
09:24I say that there is a nuclear card
09:28and when Russia
09:29when Putin feels
09:32strong
09:33he doesn't speak about this
09:35when Russia feels weak, that happened
09:37in this war about some years ago
09:39they start playing again
09:41with the nuclear card
09:43So just
09:45I'm reminding that
09:47we need to have this
09:49into account
09:50We cannot close our eyes that
09:52there are nuclear weapons
09:54on our continent
09:57there are nuclear weapons
09:59in the arsenal of Russia
10:01and we
10:02this is part
10:05of the game calculation
10:06and my appeal is that
10:08no one is speaking about this
10:11no one is taking
10:14you know
10:15account of this risk
10:16We have multiple analysts here who said
10:19they really believe to that extent
10:20it's a card that is played politically
10:22because the Russians think
10:24or seem to think
10:25weak leaders will get scared by it
10:29You disagree
10:30That's clear
10:31Let's look at the eastern flank
10:32There's a perception that
10:35the security picture for the eastern flank
10:37certainly for the Baltics and Poland
10:39has deteriorated over the past few months
10:42We've also seen the drone violations of the airspace
10:45what happened at the German airport
10:48Romania
10:49we've seen constant drone violations
10:51on and on and on and on
10:52is this now a time to rethink
10:54if this is hybrid warfare
10:57and I wonder if you use that word
10:58warfare yourself
10:59is this not a time for the Europeans
11:01to redefine
11:02what hybrid deterrence
11:04to this warfare
11:05should look like
11:06You mentioned hybrid warfare with drones
11:08and other types
11:10and other types
11:11of course
11:12it is extremely difficult
11:14to counter these drones
11:16why?
11:17It is extremely difficult
11:18to detect them
11:19they fly low
11:20they use non-metal materials
11:23it is extremely difficult
11:25to detect on the radars
11:27so if you apply
11:29anti-drone systems
11:30they need to be
11:32very very congested
11:34on your boiler
11:34that means
11:35a lot
11:36a lot
11:38a huge number
11:39of such systems
11:40and their integration
11:42and this is a huge
11:43technical challenge
11:44to all of us
11:45and that's why
11:47my call is to
11:48to think about
11:49this balance
11:49about different instruments
11:51of power
11:52and to
11:53design
11:54to formulate
11:55a feasible
11:56end state
11:57of this war
11:58because we have changed
12:01our
12:01desired
12:02end state
12:03about seven
12:04to eight times
12:05I don't remember even
12:06the formulation
12:07of these
12:09end states
12:09from the beginning
12:10of the war
12:10that position
12:11is still a minority
12:12in the European Council
12:13you say it's very different
12:14or very difficult
12:15to intercept
12:16the drones
12:17the constant violations
12:19that we're seeing repeatedly
12:19is it because
12:20the European and NATO leadership
12:22is weak
12:22or is it because
12:23they're not sending
12:23the right message
12:24if you escalate
12:25so can we
12:27so what is your proposal
12:28to send
12:29a very hard
12:30warning
12:32to Russia
12:33I agree
12:34okay
12:35what about
12:36escalation
12:36so you just accept
12:38they can do
12:38whatever they want
12:39they can put explosives
12:40on an airport
12:41they can
12:41what's the alternative
12:43no
12:44my alternative
12:45is
12:45to open
12:47the lines
12:47of communication
12:49to sit down
12:50and to discuss
12:51this is my proposal
12:52and sooner
12:54or later
12:55it will be achieved
12:57and again
12:58it depends
12:59this is a war
13:00of attrition
13:00it reflects
13:02our economies
13:02it reflects
13:03the price
13:03of the fuel
13:04the price
13:04of the gas
13:06it reflects
13:07the shortage
13:08of fuel
13:09and gas
13:09in the European Union
13:11as well
13:12my question
13:12however
13:13on the money
13:13you will have
13:14to be in a consensus
13:15question
13:16both at NATO
13:18and at a European
13:19Union level
13:20when you get told
13:21at NATO
13:21you have to pay
13:2275%
13:22you have to buy
13:24weapons
13:25that are still
13:25continue to be American
13:26at the same time
13:27we need to build
13:28our own European industry
13:30how do you go about this
13:32because what I see
13:33from the outside
13:34is
13:36you pay for American weapons
13:37while trying to build
13:38your industry
13:39while talking about
13:39made in Europe
13:40you praise your visit
13:41with Macong
13:42but to me
13:43these are two strategies
13:43that at some point
13:44it's difficult to keep them
13:45on one lane
13:46because they're quite contradictory
13:47so which one is it going to be
13:49a made in Europe
13:50preference or not
13:50the problem is that
13:52European defense industry
13:54is highly fragmented
13:55and of course
13:57we need to strengthen
13:58our defense industries
14:00safe instrument
14:01is extremely good instrument
14:03Bulgaria is very active
14:05participant in this
14:06would you want a round two
14:07there's been debate
14:08that maybe if the first round
14:09was successful
14:10there could be a second one
14:11yes there could be
14:12and this is the right approach
14:15to strengthen
14:15our industrial base
14:17to work together
14:18to communicate
14:19to coordinate
14:20and this is the future
14:21for Europe
14:22but as the prime minister
14:23of Bulgaria
14:24if you have to sign a contract
14:25and in the future
14:26you have two weapons
14:27that ultimately
14:27do the same job
14:28one is European
14:29one is made in the US
14:30would you say
14:31of course we go
14:32for the European first
14:34we need a European preference
14:35yes of course
14:36this is the part
14:37of the European strategic
14:40autonomy concept
14:41and I fully agree that
14:43and we have been working
14:44for this
14:45we need to strengthen
14:47the European pillar
14:49of NATO
14:50because
14:50we need to take care
14:52about
14:52our defense
14:54capabilities
14:55and we need to do it
14:57in a smart way
14:58we cannot exclude
14:59the United States
15:00because
15:01the United States
15:01is a leader
15:03in defense
15:04technologies
15:05we need to cooperate
15:07but of course
15:08we need to protect
15:09our defense industries
15:11otherwise
15:11they will disappear
15:12and for made in Europe
15:14is it
15:15the right way
15:16to put this
15:16in writing
15:17do we need
15:18those percentages
15:19do we need
15:20that made in Europe
15:21by law
15:22we need to operate
15:23like this
15:24otherwise
15:24we continue
15:25our strategic
15:26dependencies
15:27on the US
15:28are you in favor
15:28of legislating
15:29in this way
15:29we cannot
15:30immediately
15:32guarantee
15:33our security
15:35by ourselves
15:36even talking
15:37about the nuclear shield
15:39we cannot go
15:40without the United States
15:41of America
15:42because they
15:42provide
15:43the essence
15:44of the core
15:45defense capabilities
15:47in NATO
15:47we should
15:48it is absolutely
15:50clear
15:50it will take
15:51time for us
15:52to recover
15:54to renovate
15:56our industries
15:57our industrial base
15:58our technology
16:00development
16:01should Ukraine
16:01be a core
16:02part of it
16:02we heard
16:03from the Ukraine
16:04and saying
16:04the Europeans
16:05will need us
16:05more than
16:06at this point
16:06we need them
16:07on the technology
16:07advancement
16:08should we
16:08get them
16:09in this context
16:09Ukraine
16:10has been
16:11already
16:12a part
16:12of this
16:13many
16:14European
16:15defense
16:15industries
16:16have already
16:17invested
16:18look at
16:18Rheinmetall
16:19look at
16:19other companies
16:20they have
16:21presence
16:22they have
16:22invested
16:23they have
16:24developed
16:24strong
16:25industrial
16:26sites
16:27and presence
16:27in Ukraine
16:28Ukraine
16:29has been
16:30sharing
16:31latest
16:32state-of-the-art
16:33drone technologies
16:34they have
16:35developed
16:35through
16:36experimenting
16:37them
16:37every day
16:38on the front line
16:39so as an equal
16:40partner
16:40anyway
16:41the Ukrainians
16:41will say
16:42we will be
16:42joining
16:42the European
16:43Union
16:43so this
16:44debate
16:44at some
16:45point
16:46of course
16:47western
16:48Balkans
16:50Ukraine
16:51Moldova
16:51all of them
16:52they have
16:53place
16:54and their
16:54future
16:54is full
16:55integration
16:56into the
16:57European
16:57family
16:57this is
16:58obvious
16:58this is
16:59of course
16:59as a
17:00final
17:00question
17:01when we
17:02hear
17:02NATO
17:023.0
17:03the impression
17:04that I
17:05get
17:06nobody
17:06will say
17:07publicly
17:07with these
17:08words
17:08but ultimately
17:09it means
17:09that
17:09we are
17:11going to
17:11have to
17:11pay
17:12big time
17:12in NATO
17:13we are
17:13going to
17:14still
17:14have to
17:14pay
17:15for those
17:16US
17:16weapons
17:16otherwise
17:17there will
17:17be
17:17retaliation
17:18for the
17:18administration
17:18but then
17:19we're
17:20going to
17:20have to
17:20do all
17:20the hard
17:21work
17:24that means
17:25real
17:26defense
17:26will be
17:27us
17:27and
17:27ultimately
17:28all
17:28that
17:28will
17:28be
17:28left
17:29is
17:30the
17:30US
17:30nuclear
17:31umbrella
17:31that
17:32will
17:32protect
17:33the
17:33Europeans
17:34and
17:35still
17:35be
17:35there
17:35as
17:35a
17:36last
17:36resort
17:36in
17:37NATO
17:37that
17:37is
17:37essentially
17:38what
17:38NATO
17:383.0
17:39means
17:39for
17:39the
17:39Europeans
17:40is
17:40that
17:40how
17:41you
17:41see
17:41it
17:41too
17:41you
17:42say
17:42you're
17:42not
17:43politically
17:43correct
17:43you're
17:44not
17:44in
17:44the
17:44mainstream
17:44so
17:44I'm
17:45sure
17:45you
17:45can
17:45speak
17:45freely
17:46on
17:46this
17:46when we
17:47speak
17:48about
17:48NATO
17:493.0
17:50and
17:51the
17:51defense
17:51capabilities
17:52of
17:53Europe
17:53we
17:54should
17:54put
17:54on
17:55the
17:55table
17:57economic
17:57part
17:58social
17:59part
17:59we
18:00should
18:00put
18:00tariffs
18:01on
18:01the
18:01table
18:02we
18:02should
18:03put
18:03European
18:04cars
18:05talking
18:05with
18:05our
18:06most
18:06important
18:07strategic
18:07ally
18:08the
18:08United
18:08States
18:08we
18:10should
18:10put
18:10because
18:11when
18:12we
18:12speak
18:13about
18:13defense
18:13capabilities
18:14it
18:14means
18:15technology
18:15and
18:16industrial
18:16development
18:17it
18:18should
18:18not
18:18go
18:19just
18:19for
18:19military
18:19equipment
18:20it
18:20should
18:20go
18:20for
18:21everything
18:21we
18:22cooperate
18:23with
18:23the
18:23United
18:23States
18:24so
18:24tariffs
18:25are
18:26part
18:26of
18:27this
18:27approach
18:27and
18:28Europe
18:28should
18:29put
18:29everything
18:30on
18:31the
18:31table
18:31your
18:32analysis
18:32of
18:32NATO
18:333.0
18:33I
18:33still
18:34didn't
18:34fully
18:34understand
18:35it
18:35because
18:35you
18:35said
18:35we
18:36need
18:36to
18:36put
18:36our
18:37economic
18:37relationship
18:38and
18:38even
18:38tariffs
18:39the
18:39only
18:39tariffs
18:39are
18:40seen
18:40are
18:40the
18:40Americans
18:41and
18:41European
18:41products
18:42so
18:42by
18:4315%
18:44they
18:44tripled
18:44and
18:45we
18:45pay
18:46more
18:46into
18:46NATO
18:46I
18:47am
18:47just
18:47wondering
18:47from
18:48your
18:48military
18:48background
18:49when
18:49you
18:50look
18:50at
18:50this
18:50NATO
18:503.0
18:51and
18:51you
18:51say
18:51this
18:52is
18:52the
18:52plan
18:52for
18:52the
18:52next
18:5315
18:53years
18:53what
18:53does
18:54it
18:54look
18:54like
18:54do
18:55you
18:55have
18:55US
18:55troops
18:55station
18:56in
18:56Europe
18:56or
18:56you
18:57won't
18:58I
18:58think
18:58we
18:59need
18:59also
19:01more
19:02effective
19:03diplomacy
19:04speaking
19:04with
19:05the
19:05United
19:05States
19:05so
19:06to
19:06bring
19:07everything
19:07in
19:08one
19:08basket
19:08because
19:09everything
19:10is
19:10strongly
19:11connected
19:12we
19:12cannot
19:12separate
19:14defense
19:16technology
19:16from
19:17science
19:18from
19:18human
19:19capital
19:19from
19:20industrial
19:21base
19:21and
19:22all
19:24the
19:24products
19:24with
19:25dual
19:25usage
19:26and
19:26they
19:26mix
19:26especially
19:27in
19:27AI
19:28and
19:28we
19:29are
19:29lagging
19:29behind
19:29here
19:30in
19:30Europe
19:30in
19:30AI
19:31we
19:32should
19:32cooperate
19:33more
19:34you
19:35know
19:35strongly
19:36with
19:36the
19:36United
19:37States
19:37about
19:38AI
19:39and
19:40we
19:41should
19:41go
19:41together
19:42as
19:42strategic
19:42allies
19:43and
19:43partners
19:43because
19:44there
19:45are
19:45some
19:46other
19:46movements
19:47around
19:47the
19:47world
19:47in
19:48this
19:48direction
19:48as
19:48well
19:49Prime Minister
19:50thank you
19:50so much
19:51for your
19:51time
19:51you've
19:52been
19:52very
19:53generous
19:53with
19:53your
19:53time
19:53so
19:54thank you
19:54very much
19:54for joining
19:55us
19:55thanks
