00:08I'd like to welcome onto the stage U.S. Ambassador Nathan Matthew Whittaker, thank you very much
00:12Ambassador, all the way from Iowa. That's right. You were just back home recently. Last week, I took SecGen, I
00:20had invited him to the state fair in Iowa. Famous Iowa state fair. Yeah, the famous Iowa state fair, often
00:27copied, never replicated.
00:28I think it was really well received, delivered an important message to really part of the country that doesn't often
00:36get, you know, sort of the message from NATO and from the Secretary General. It was good to get him
00:42there and I think he really enjoyed it.
00:44There was a survey which showed that the United States populations, citizens in the U.S., their support for NATO
00:50was declining at the moment. That was something that was quite interesting coming out of that.
00:56It's still quite high though. If I remember the report, it was in the 60s, which right now in the
01:01United States, if you get anybody to agree to 60% of anything, that's pretty good.
01:04You're winning streak. You are winning. But I mean, like, listen, we need to not forget that the explanation of
01:16the value of NATO to the American people and quite frankly to all citizens of all 32 allies is a
01:24story that we need to continue to tell.
01:26And we need to make sure that everyone understands why we have the alliance after 77 years and why it
01:33continues to provide value for the taxpayers, because obviously we contribute, the United States contributes a lot, all of our
01:40allies contribute a lot to common funding and to the force sourcing and everything that we're doing at NATO.
01:48They contribute, obviously, me as the ambassador and my entire staff at the embassy.
01:54Well, indeed, and that is the key question. Why do we have NATO? Because from what we're experiencing in NATO
02:00territory in the past couple of years, but in particular over the past few months, the increase in hybrid war
02:05attacks, whether it's drones, whether it's arson, sabotage.
02:09We saw the Estonian government formally accused the Kremlin of the arson and sabotage attack on a defense company.
02:17And we saw the Leipzig drone incident as well. There is a disjointedness about how the NATO should respond to
02:25that. What is your own position?
02:27I think, first of all, typically these hybrid actions as they're happening or after they happen can't be determined who
02:36is behind it.
02:37That only comes through investigation by oftentimes law enforcement and judicial processes together with, you know, intelligence agencies working together.
02:47And so I think we have seen kind of the model, I would say, is what happened in Leipzig, where,
02:54you know, the Germans investigated, responded, issued sort of consequences for after they attributed it to Russia.
03:02And at the same time, we're coordinating with allies and coordinating with NATO.
03:08And we were talking about it at the table at the NAC. So I think that is right now a
03:14pretty good model for how to address these.
03:18And, you know, everyone wants sort of some line in the sand that says, if this happens, then sort of
03:26that means we invoke Article 5.
03:28But, you know, Article 5 is really ultimately intentionally vague.
03:32It's up to the 32 allies through consultation and conversation and obviously involvement of capitals to work through that issue.
03:41And it is, I think we're in a really good spot.
03:44But the bottom line is, let's ask why. Why is this happening?
03:50It's happening mainly to deter NATO and allies from supporting Ukraine, from, you know, supporting other efforts that the allies
04:01and members of the alliance want to support.
04:04And so, you know, that just means we should lean in more as to what we're doing.
04:08We should not be deterred.
04:10Indeed. But you hear from a lot of security services all across NATO that what Russia or what the Kremlin
04:16is doing right now is becoming less risk averse because there is very little consequence.
04:21Because, as you said yourself, the hybrid threats are sort of below threshold.
04:25So they don't lead to Article 5, which has only ever been triggered once, as we know.
04:29And they don't lead to an Article 4, a formal situation, a lot of the time, because if you have
04:34an Article 4 formal conversation and nothing comes out of it, it sort of makes NATO a little bit weak.
04:40There are many consequences that are both sometimes obvious and sometimes, you know, not for general sharing that can happen.
04:53And it is, the bottom line, though, is that this is, if it is action by Russia, which, again, Estonia
05:03has ascribed that, the Germans have ascribed that to two recent incidents, you know, why are they doing?
05:09The reason is to, you know, kind of make allies not want to support Ukraine as much.
05:16And the answer for that is more support for Ukraine.
05:19A lot of others are also saying there's a dual perspective here, that it's about testing NATO unity, that the
05:25attack could be a small ground invasion, drones and so on, that could test NATO to the point where they
05:33have to have Article 4 and Article 5.
05:35And maybe there isn't that unity and maybe the United States isn't there like it might have been.
05:41Well, we're here and I continue to show up every day and every week along with, you know, all the
05:46members of my mission.
05:47And, you know, we're not stepping back.
05:49We're just asking our allies to step forward and join us.
05:52And many of them are responding.
05:54But, you know, we're not here to brainstorm ideas for our adversaries to challenge us.
06:00But I can tell you, we do have unity at the table.
06:04And I think one of the reasons we have unity at the table is we are anticipating what the future
06:09could look like.
06:10And we understand where things are going and we need to be prepared and we need to be ready.
06:16And that's the thing that, as I talk to our allies at NATO, readiness is really the number one, you
06:24know, more capabilities, but really a readiness that we have not known.
06:28And to be on a war footing.
06:29I mean, it's that simple.
06:31So Article 5 is safe in the hands of this administration anyway.
06:34Yeah, I mean, I think so.
06:35But, like, Article 5 is also about consensus.
06:39And it's all coming together at 32 and responding to whatever the situation in the moment.
06:46It's only been used once.
06:47That was in response to September 11th, which we just, you know, celebrated the 25th year since that awful day
06:56happened in September 2001.
06:59And so, you know, it's very fresh for a lot of us.
07:02But we also, I mean, I understand how NATO responded.
07:06I understand how our allies responded and how many of them, you know, fought shoulder to shoulder with us and
07:10sacrificed right there with us in Afghanistan and Iraq.
07:13And in the next few months, we'll hear the results of the U.S. force posture review due by December,
07:22we believe.
07:23But we've heard some leaks that it could be as many as 25,000 to 40,000 troops withdrawn from
07:28NATO territory.
07:29Can you give us a bit of clarity about that?
07:31And I suppose the implications that that will have for the nuclear deterrence and deterrence in general.
07:36Because, of course, we do need capabilities, but human beings and soldiers are important, too.
07:41Yeah, those reports are wrong.
07:42I mean, that has not been delivered yet.
07:47The plan hasn't even been finalized by the folks at the Secretary of War's policy shop.
07:54And so I think any kind of leaks about that are folks that are, you know, just trying to, you
08:01know, cause confusion.
08:01The bottom line is, is we have reaffirmed over and over the nuclear umbrella that we provide to NATO and
08:09our allies.
08:10We have continued to say that we're going to stay engaged in Europe.
08:14This is a, not only is it a forced posture review, it is also a forced posture and basing review.
08:21And so we're looking at the issues about access basing and overflight, some of which were a little clunky during
08:28Epic Fury.
08:29And so we're, you know, having some conversations with allies.
08:31We're also having conversations about host nation support.
08:34We have a lot of allies that obviously want American troops.
08:37From a U.S. ambassador standpoint, America first means that we look at it from what's in the interest of
08:43the United States of America and its people and its taxpayers.
08:46And so we are doing that right now.
08:49We're saying, you know, what is the value of our basing?
08:52Is it what we thought it was?
08:54And we're just doing a very kind of mathematical, mechanical analysis of how we're laid down globally because we have
09:04to address global challenges.
09:06Our allies expect that out of us to be able to do that.
09:09On the basing issue, because that was a major bone of contention at the early, at the first stages of
09:15the war in Iran.
09:17And it really didn't seem to have sort of dissipated too much when you hear Secretary of War Pete Hegg
09:23said sort of being very critical of member states for not initially allowing basing rights.
09:27Will there be some retribution for some of those countries within NATO that didn't allow those basing rights?
09:33We heard even Emmanuel Macron, the French president, just the other day making the point that, you know, they weren't
09:38involved in the war in Iran because there were no consultation.
09:40But it didn't sit right with Donald Trump.
09:42You know, he was extremely vocally disappointed.
09:45Yeah.
09:46What I can tell you is we had a couple allies that I used the word clunky.
09:51I'm going to use that again.
09:52I'm, you know, again, I'm a plain spoken Midwesterner.
09:54And that seems to be exactly kind of what it was.
09:56We had way too many conversations about how and where and what the purpose of airplanes might be.
10:05And obviously, at the speed of relevance, you can't, you know, lawyers with clipboards at the end of runways approving
10:10or rejecting flights is not the way you can fight a war effectively.
10:16And so, again, we're having those conversations with just a few countries that we had issues with to make sure
10:21we understand the next time, you know.
10:24That doesn't happen again.
10:24Well, it doesn't happen again, or if it does, maybe, you know, we need to reevaluate.
10:28But we had many allies in Europe that allowed us to do everything we wanted to do with our bases
10:34that we have.
10:35And so, I mean, it's actually a good news story.
10:39And I see it very much as allies and our agreements bilaterally with those allies working very well.
10:47And they were very supportive.
10:49So you believe relations have improved since then?
10:52Yeah.
10:52I mean, again, it is not perfect.
10:54You know, it's like any family.
10:56You know, there are a few siblings you don't like and you don't want to talk to.
10:59But, you know, mostly, in all seriousness, it is very much right now I think NATO is working as an
11:06alliance.
11:07You know, I think the election of President Trump caused a lot of, you know, sort of uncertainty among our
11:15allies that myself and Secretary Rubio, Secretary Hegseth, and especially the president, I think, have worked through both at The
11:22Hague, at Ankara, in the summits, and then also in the ministerials.
11:27And we've had very straightforward conversations about these issues, and I think we're in a good place.
11:33But, you know, the next step, obviously, is what we're going to do with the forced posture and basing review.
11:42And, you know, that's yet to be determined in certainly, you know, months away right now.
11:47Okay.
11:47U.S. Ambassador Nathaniel Bittiger, thank you very much for joining us at the Euronews Defense Summit.
11:52All right.
11:52Thank you.
11:52Thank you.
