Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news.
Following his meeting moments ago in the Oval Office with President Trump is NATO's Secretary General, Mark Ruta, Mister Secretary General, Welcome back to Bloomberg TV and Radio. It means a lot of yourself. Take your time at what I know is a very busy day. Absolutely, we saw you in there. We were watching the hole back and forth with yourself, the President, and a gaggle of reporters. In the Oval Office. You had everything from whiteboards to stats to make the
argument to President Trump. Did you manage to soften some of the edges when it comes to Trump and the Alliance?
Well, I mean what I think is important is to be fair, and fairness dictates that this president is really doing a huge amount of work to get NATO in better shape. He had a big success last year in the Hague with the five percent spending commitment. But what I wanted to show to him tonight is that over the last ten years since forty five, if an out
tramp forty seven. We see this secularly English on European and Canadian allies spending more, but also but it comes to the year on year increase forty seven and twenty to twenty five, almost twenty percent more spending, which is of course because of Russia and the threat and the war in Ukraine, but also very much because this president is quite forcefully encouraging allies to spend more. And I think it is fair to share that with him.
Well, in mister Secretary General, it's not just the president, it's others in his administration as well. The Defense Secretary Pete Hegsett set in Brussels recently that the US would stop paying NATO dues if the allies don't meet defense spending targets. And your understanding is this just the long term five percent target that matters, or has has this administration set out to you that there needs to be more interim goals met in the short term.
Well, but we are seeing already with the almost twenty percent increase that you are reaching the mes interims of subsorption capacity. You can only each year on year spend so much more because you have to find and higher and contract and managment in a uniform. Obviously, you have to work very hard, and the US is doing that, Europe is doing that on expanding the output of the defense industrial base at a bitch at the moment on both types of the Atlantic it's simply not producing enough.
So the pennsident is now meeting with the bosses of the big defense industrial companies in the United States to again make that argument. But then given dead background, spending almost twenty percent more means that he not only got to promise in the Hague, but at alash are now delivering. Take Germany spending twice as much in twenty twenty nine as it did in twenty twenty one, more than a half and fifty billion by twenty twenty nine. These are really big numbers and a great success.
I want to ask you about Ukraine, Secretary General and what you heard from President Trump today. It was shocking for a lot of people to see massive black clouds of smoke pluming over Saint Petersburg. We know that Ukraine is reaching deeper into Russian territory and making remarkable use of its advanced drone technology. Does President Trump believe Ukraine can win this war militarily?
Well, let me not speak for President Trump because I think he should do that himself, but obviously be discussed Ukraine, and you heard this also in the public part of the meeting with the media in the Oval Office that he acknowledged that Ukraine is doing well on the battlefield, is doing well in terms of hitting some of the critical infrastructure in Russia. I really think that over the last three to six months, Ukraine is doing much better.
And when you look at the amount of Russians getting killed or seriously wounded, we are now reaching numbers of thirty to thirty five thousand. When you look at the war in Vietnam in fourteen years the United States lost, Russia is now losing in five weeks what the United States lost in fourteen years in Vietnam. Russia's losing now in three weeks what Russians was in ten years in
Afghanistan in the nineteen eighties. These are staggering numbers. So as you saw in the public part of the meeting, the President Framuch acknowledging the fact that the Ukrainians are doing so much better also thanks to US support, which is they're paid for the European and Canadian allies and other key helped the US is providing.
Well.
As we consider what Ukraine has been able to accomplish in the longer range strikes, we are seeing into Russian territory, Secretary General, have any of the NATO allies expressed some concern about that, the idea that it could spark further Russian retaliation and rope NATO countries into it.
Well, I think we should start by seeing what happened in twenty twenty two. By the way, in twenty fourteen when they grabbed Crimea and then in February twenty twenty two when they started to full onslaughts on Ukraine. This was unprovoked. There was absolutely no reason for the Russians to do this. So it's only fair for Ukraine to be able to defend itself. And they do this with help from the best, but also because of their own ingenuity.
They're extremely successful in constantly updating the long technology and the end time DeLong technology, staying ahead of the Russians and therefore really being successful on the battlefield.
Now, it's really something we watched you very closely in the Oval Office today, Secretary General. This went on for quite some time and it was not your first visit of course, with President Trump. Do you have the playbook?
Now?
Did you cook up the recipe? You show up with the goods, a whiteboard, the stats and a story that the President wants to hear, and you might be able to advance your cause.
You know, what I believe is to be fair when leadership is successful, His leadership is successful. And what I wanted to show today is the successful in three ways. Well only around a degree in a nuclear capability to a NATO, not only getting the Allies to deliver to commit to five percent defense spending, but also to deliver on the spending, and that's clearly what is happening at
the moment. And third, by taking that coute, that mental of being the leader of the free world, and when he meets an Ancora, he will meet with all the Allies, but also ten countries there as guests from the released from in the Pacific, a total combined GDP of seventy seven zero seventy trillion dollars two and a half the size of the United States. Absolutely there to hear his views, to get his thoughts on the next steps we collectively have to take.
Well. Of course, the financial aspect of this and the investments in the defense industrial base are one part of it, mister Secretary General, but there's also the consideration of actual human capital and US military forces that are currently stationed all around Europe. Obviously, we've now seen withdraws considerations this administration is making about moving troops around. Further, how do you avoid anything being chaotic in nature as that plays out?
And how does Europe make sure that it's able to adequately defend himself itself in a surprise scenario. What are those preparations like.
I think the United States is doing that. So let's first agree that the United States has to take care of multiple theaters, not only Europe, also for example in the Pacific, and if a situation would occur where they have to defend both sides of the equation, both in the Pacific and Europe, they have to avoid the situation in which they have spread their resources too thinly. This is why Europeans have to step up. This is NATO
three point zero, stronger Europe and a stronger NATO. That means that the US will stay involved when it comes to the nuclear umbrella, but also when it comes to the conventional but aver time. Right, you now will see and this is a structured process, is that the Europeans are taking over more and more of that leadership role. For example, when it comes to the three combatant commands.
They will over the next eighteen to twenty four months move from American generals and admirals to European generals and admirals. So that's also an example of European stepping up. But also when it comes to UK, the fact that the US is still providing all the support but paid for by Europeans in Canada, which is only fair. So europe stepping up, the US staying heavily involved when it comes to the conventional nuclear detterns in Europe.
Presidents had a lot to say about NATO's lack of involvement in the Strait of Horror moves. Did that come up today? Did he have a message for you on this or is he moving on? Now?
You've seen this in the public part, and I know there is disappointment, And the point I wanted to make is that the disappointment has to do with a couple of isolated cases. Yes, they are there. I understand to disappointment, But when you look at your overall picture of European nations living up to their bilateral basing basing agreements with the United States. So this is not NATO these or
bilateral agreements, but obviously they are all allies. When you look at that, what you see is between the ends of February, when the war started on the twenty eighth of February until the ceasefire mid April, that between four thousand and five thousand US planes taking off from European basis. This is Europe as one big power projection platform forty years.
President know that before you told them?
I guess so, Yes, he knows all these numbers. But I think it is fair to also point out to that fact. Yeah.
Well, as we consider the different facts and figures here, mister Secretary General, when we consider the actual articles that buying together the NATO Alliance, including Article five. I know before you came over to speak with us, you we're speaking with a number of reporters, and you told them that you are absolutely certain that the US would protect Europe if necessary. Is that just a certainty that you feel the US would abide by Article five or did
the President say that to you directly? Did he verbally reaffirm that commitment?
Again, I will never, in my role as Sector General disclose what we discuss betrying between closed doors, but let me say this Article five is there to protect the whole of the alliance, and the US is not only involved in NATO to protect Europe. NATO was also there
to protect the United States. You've seen Jona stee At, the Prime Minister of Norway, visiting the White House in April last year and showing those charts with these huge Russian nuclear submarines just over the border from Norway in these big Russian ports, and he explained to the President these submarines are not there to attack Norway. They are there to attact the United States and prevent these submarines
to become a threat to the United States. We have the Alliance working together making sure that these submarines are not capable of reaching the shores on this side of the Atlantic. And then when it comes to Europe as such, the fact that the US is so heavily involved in Europe also gives to the United States the ability to do long range strikes, the ability to control critical choke points, the ability to have industrial depth when it comes to
defense industrial productions. So there are many reagions why the US is revolved not only to protect Europe, but also because the defense of the US mainland is involved. Here.
President has some nice things to say about Turkey and President Erduwan in the Oval office today and of course we had pretty big news. It was a market moving headline, the President announcing is sending more engines aircraft engines to Turkey despite objections from some in Congress secretary journalists. Is this the right move right now?
I never commented about these by that's all decisions you have to understand. When there are discussions between allies, you will see me going mute and then trying to help behind the scenes when decisions are being made between allies.
When it comes to specific defense industrial decisions, I'm always staying out of that, of course, taking note for me, one thing is crucial keeping the allies together, making sure we are as strong as possible in the United States is providing the leadership and the defense industial output and the encouragement to make sure we stay strong.
Well and understanding your reluctance to talk about specific defense systems between countries, can you shed some light as to whether there is a conversation happening amongst all of the allies about increasing the supply of patriots specifically, what is the nature of those conversations.
Well, that's a crucial conversation because the Patriots missiles, the back three missiles are crucial, but it comes to the Patriot systems to be a maximum effective obviously, and what you're seeing at the moment is that Ukraine needs them to protect their cities, to protect their critical infrastructure. The Russians are not able to advance on the front line. They are losing a lot of Russians as we discussed
already in this interview. But obviously there is still a threat from Russia when it comes to cities and the critical infrastructure in Ukraine. So that's one reason why we need to ramp up Patriot missile production. There is close cooperation between companies in the United States and companies in Europe to help with that productions or a lot is
going on. I guess the meeting the President is now having with the big defense industry of companies will also partly be about the Patriots, but also the other defense industry output of the United States. So yes, this is absolutely being discussed and it is very important.
This is what you need most now. The interceptors for Patriots fads, are there others?
Secretary, of course, we also need long range ammunition. We need everything to ramp up the production of everything. The good news is that our stockpiles are in a good position, so we can defend ourselves. But with the war in Ukraine and the war in the Middle East, obviously we have to make sure that we keep that production going.
And with all the money coming in. There's also a from a purely commercial perspective for defense industrial companies that region to rempop production because the demand is there and the money is there, both in the US and Europe and Canada.
NATO Secretary General Mark Ruter, we thank you so much, Secretary General. We'd love to follow up after the summit in Okrea. Thank you for being so generous with your time.