Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news not.
Richard, thank you for talking to Bloomberg in these very seats. Yesterday, Vladimir Lensky sort of sat and told me that the one thing he wanted was he wanted American troops in Ukraine after after any kind of piece is called. His first preference, of course, was NATO, but his second thing was the necessity of having Americans there.
Do you agree with that? Can I be.
Totally open with you. I'm not sure that this vice to discuss future peace deals through the media. I mean, if I was, you're telling me that if you're Vladimir, Vladimir's putting, you're sitting in a reclining chair, smoking your big cigar, and you can tick the boxes yes or not, territory given up, yes or not, NATO or whatever. I mean, let's not do that. But we have to focus on is to get him, vladimirs. Lensky in the best possib
opposition to start those talks. And what helps, for examples, what Trump did this morning, President Trump in announcing or yesterday announcing this.
Extra sanction package on Russia. That's the way forward. And you think that you can have a real effect.
Absolutely if the Europeans will also help. They're doing a lot, but they could work vis your magazine conjunction. And then of course we also have to see what the Ukraine needs more in terms of weapons supplying. I guess if the US continues that the Europe has to pay more for those weapons, which is on illogical, and of course we have to spend more here in.
This part of the world.
This morning, I think you said that you know, this is Europe's problem, it's not Trump's.
We shouldn't be blaming him.
There's many people here whining and complaining about Trump, and I would say the problem is not Trump for the US polem is Europe. The problem is Europe because at the moment we are not spending enough. Trump is also pointed when the US is supplying a lot of weaponry into Ukraine, that we could pay more of the financial burden of that than we are doing currently. And he has always consistently been clear about the fact that he feels that we are under the US umbrella here and
not paying enough for that. And luckily, thanks to him in the first term, we are paying more. But with the present level of spending, we will not keep ourselves safe.
If we can both agree that more spending would be good. Isn't there a sort of bigger issue behind it. It's not so much the levels of spending, it's the way it's done at the moment. It's such a mess of competing people, with competing tanks.
Everything's a bit of it.
Is there more to be gained by actually having more cohesive spending better done than the actual number?
No, it's and then I'm afraid it is end to number and it will have to be really much more than we're spending now in this part of natal and by the way, in Canada, so that those not on two percent this year have to reach the two percent. We cannot create it any longer. And then collectively we will decide later this year what exactly the new number should be, but it will be much more than a
two percent. And you're right at the same time on the innovation, on joining procurement, on getting the big contracts done. We have the defense in this show based the defense industry, we have to be much better. And by the way, on this last issue, we also need the US to step up because also the US defense in your showbase is not producing enough. We are from Europe now spending out of eighty billions in twenty twenty two buying from the US. That could be much more if the US produced.
More About the idea that this is actually part of a sort of bigger contest. You've got later on one side, we've got Russia, China, Iran on the other. What is your you've come into this job, what is your view of that set up at the moment that those two of pousing forces.
Started three half months ago.
Two early conclusion is one, we are safe now, not in five years if you don't spend more. And second on your question, this is not a conflict between Russia and Ukraine or Russia Europe. Is really a geopolitical issue because of North Korea, China and Iran. And that's why we need to get to a good deal. And we can only get to a good deal if you don't negotiate through the media.
And the good deal means.
That you will not have put in high fiving with Skimiumon and Chia Chinping and the mulas in around. It's crucial that we come out stronger, that the US, the West is upcoming out on top.
And what about the way it looks.
I mean the amount of money we are spending on defense and procurement compared with what China, and how do you.
Think that stacks up a real problem.
But there is an issue on spending, and of course a Russia is not spending one third of a state budget on defense.
Also China is ramping up.
But when you look at the output of the defense industrial base, China is producing now five six times or the US is producing. As a collective NATO, we are producing in a full year in terms of ammunition, which is crucial. What's Russia's producing in three months?
This is not sustainable.
And that's why I'm saying for four or five years, we cannot defend ourselves if we don't get these two things right.
To spending and the defense product of the problem. And you used to be the Prime Minister of the Netherlands for a very long time, isn't the problem?
How difficult it is to convert factories weaponry towards things.
Putin's got this huge advantage.
You can simply take a car factory and turn it into making tanks or whatever.
That's true, but we have seen in the past if we can do it. Look at the United States in the Second World War that when Roosevelts decided to enter the war after Pearl Harbor, that the US was able to ramp up the industry production because basically putting the whole to the US on a war footing. The minimum we now have to do is to move into a warm mindset. Our mindset should be we are not literally
at war. Yes, through hybrids and cyber attacks and assassination attempts and gemming off airplanes, there's a lot happening there which we have to fight back on, but we are not in a real hard work at the moment. But we need to get to the mindset, and the mindset will then also make it possible for us to get on our industry based more on a war footing.
One last thing on mindset, Trump all this rhetoric, tariff's.
All these things.
Can you think of any military alliance in history that has survived with one set of people issuing tariff threats and things on others. It's very hard, I think, to think of that as an alliance when there's so.
Much friction within it.
And it also helps you to get these debates going, and I've seen some actually come out up in Commissioned saying we have to buy more oral and more LNG from the US. So they are reacting, they are stepping up. And when you look at defense spending, I mean it is a big deficit in terms of Europe buying so much work from the US and the US buying from Europe.
So it is a bit of a mixed picture.
But in the end that Trump is starting that debate is good and he will always do it in his own way, which is mister door in his hand coming in. But that's okay because that makes it possible for you then to come to an agreement. I'm not too work.
Well, let's say a good nature and on Mark Rutter, thank you very much for talking to us.