Politics

Mark Rutte: It's important Ukraine negotiates from a position of strength

NATO’s secretary general tells Al Majalla it’s up to Kyiv to set the timing and conditions for talks with Moscow and affirms the alliance’s strong ties with the Gulf and growing unease with China

Al Majalla

NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte during his interview with Al Majalla

Mark Rutte: It's important Ukraine negotiates from a position of strength

Ibrahim Hamidi

last update on 06 Dec 2024

Brussels: In an in-depth interview with Al Majalla, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte reveals that he had discussed strategies for achieving "a fair agreement" in Ukraine with US President-elect Donald Trump. “It is our duty to ensure that Ukraine enters any negotiations with Russia from a position of strength,” Rutte said. “This involves providing essential defensive support, such as anti-missile and offensive systems, to bolster their position. This is our top priority for the coming months—January, February, and March. After that, it will be up to the Ukrainian government to determine the conditions and initiate the timing for negotiations with Russia.”

This marks Rutte's first interview with an Arab media outlet since assuming office. Reflecting on NATO’s evolving defence posture, Rutte credited Trump for pushing Europe to increase its defence spending. “I thanked him for motivating Europe to enhance its defence investments. Currently, the European members of NATO are averaging a defence expenditure of 2% of GDP—significantly higher than when he took office in 2016,” Rutte noted.

When asked about Russia’s threat to use nuclear weapons, Rutte responded, “NATO takes nuclear issues extremely seriously—there is no ambiguity about that. However, I believe Russia’s threats are largely performative.” He observed how NATO’s relationship with Russia had drastically shifted since 2010 when former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev attended a NATO summit. “Now, it’s inconceivable to imagine a meeting with President Putin in The Hague or his participation in a NATO summit. This drastic shift reflects not only the profound changes in our relationship but also the significant losses incurred as a result of his actions.”

Turning to the challenges posed by China, Rutte emphasised NATO’s collective resolve. “NATO must take China seriously and work as allies to safeguard ourselves against these challenges. Our cooperation with the United States in this regard transcends individual leadership—be it Trump or Biden. It stems from a shared recognition within NATO of the need to approach China cautiously and without naivety.”

Rutte also clarified NATO’s involvement in the Middle East, saying that while “we are not directly engaged in the region, we are indirectly involved. We maintain strong and multifaceted relationships with Gulf states and work closely with them.” He stressed that NATO has no plans to expand its territorial presence to include the Gulf or the Indo-Pacific regions. “Our focus remains on strengthening partnerships with these countries, which we consider strategic allies and with whom collaboration remains central to our approach,” he added.

Below is the transcript of the interview conducted at NATO headquarters in Brussels.

After Donald Trump won the US election, you went to Florida and met with him. Could you please tell us what you discussed with the president-elect?

Well, I cannot disclose what he said, but we worked very well together when I was prime minister between 2016 and 2020, in his first term. I think we both enjoy working together. And I thought it would be good to meet him early after the election. We had a very good conversation.

I thanked him for forcing us in Europe to spend more on our defence. We now spend an average of 2% (of our respective GDPs) on NATO, much more than when he came into office in 2016. I've come to the view that we must spend much more than 2% if, in the long term, we want to stay safe in NATO—both the US and Europe.

Secondly, we discussed the need to ramp up our defence industrial production. We are currently not producing enough compared to Russia and China. Thirdly, we discussed how to get to a good deal for Ukraine. Iran, China, North Korea, and Russia are all working together and will be high-fiving each other if a bad deal is struck. So we have to get to a good deal and make sure that the Ukrainians can start an eventual negotiation with the Russians from a position of strength. We agreed to continue the conversation through our teams but also directly in the run-up to him taking over and post-January.

Did you receive assurances on NATO’s sustainability in the next four years?

Let me be very careful about this because if I had had that conversation and he had been on television telling the audience what I said, I would think this is strange. And he would rightly believe that if I answered this question directly, it would not be helpful. It doesn’t help building that trust. I know him very well—we're both politicians, he and I. And we know that ultimately, our task is to make sure that our respective countries are safe, the economy is running well and that there are enough jobs and prosperity.

President Trump comes from a place where he wants a strong economy, but he also wants a strong United States that is safe—and knows that what is happening in the transatlantic and the Euro-Atlantic and what is happening in the Indo-Pacific are becoming more and more interconnected—for example with the North Koreans getting involved in Russia. I really look forward to working with him on all these issues.

Iran, China, North Korea, and Russia will be high-fiving each other if a bad deal is struck on Ukraine. We have to help boost their negotiating position.

NATO Secretary General, Mark Rutte

It seems that you are comfortable after that meeting.

Because, again, I know that we will continue the conversation. I was also very impressed by the foreign policy people he picked: Rubio, Mike Waltz, and the new ambassador here; they are all very strong people. He really cobbled together a strong team.

Just earlier, you mentioned a peace plan for Ukraine. What is the best peace plan for Ukraine?

Well, it has to be done step by step. The first thing we have to do now is to massively support Ukraine to be able to start those talks from a position of strength. That means we must ensure we pump enough military aid into Ukraine. That means anti-missile systems but also offensive systems. That is absolutely priority one, two, and three, which could go on to January, February, and March of next year. Then, it would be up to the Ukrainian government to decide on the terms and when to start negotiations with the Russians.

But what do you think this deal should look like?

Well, I have my ideas on this, and others will have their own ideas. But in the end, it is the Ukrainians fighting this war, not us. That means we should respect Ukraine's view on what the next steps should be. But it must start with making sure that it starts these talks from a position of strength. And that means that we have to do more to support them. NATO can help by implementing what we agreed upon in Washington: the pledge of €40 billion and the command centre we are building in Wiesbaden.

It's been said that at least part of the Trump plan is (a) to recognise reality and (b) to delay Ukraine's NATO membership for 20 years.

Again, I think we should start with Ukraine itself, ensuring they can start in a position where they can have successful negotiations with the Russians. And then, of course, from that position to take the next steps.

US Army — 140 Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS)

After Biden's decision to let Ukrainians strike into Russian territory, Moscow announced it had amended its nuclear doctrine. Does this concern you?

NATO takes the nuclear issue extremely seriously, no doubt. But this is all sabre-rattling by the Russians. NATO very much supports its allies and doesn't put limitations on the weapons systems they deliver to Ukraine. Ultimately, it is up to individual allies to decide whether they put restrictions on the weapon systems they provide.

Regarding the Middle East, I think we have three interrelated issues. One is the NATO mission in Iraq. Second, you will open a NATO office in Amman. Three, Gulf security and maritime routes. What is NATO's role in these three areas?

NATO's core role is to keep the Euro-Atlantic safe. So, in that sense, we are not involved in the Middle East, but indirectly, we are very much involved. As you rightly said, we have the NATO mission in Iraq. We have individual NATO allies tirelessly navigating the crisis in Gaza and with Hezbollah. We have seen successful negotiations on the latter, spearheaded by the French and the Americans. And while we shouldn't be naïve and believe that everything is stable in Lebanon, at least the Americans and the French have secured a ceasefire. And you are absolutely right, we will open an office in Amman.

This is part of our outreach to the Southern neighbourhood. That means that we really want to work together with countries like Tunisia, Mauritania, Morocco, and basically the whole of Africa—particularly the northern part of Africa, as well as the Middle East. And that is why we have those close relations. And we even have a special representative for the South who is working on that. But, of course, it is a different sort of relationship than we have within NATO. It's important to make that distinction.

NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte speaks to Al Majalla's editor-in-chief, Ibrahim Hamidi

And the Gulf?

The same goes for the Gulf. We, of course, have relations with Gulf countries and work with them. However, we are not in the business of expanding NATO to the Gulf or the Indo-Pacific. But these are partners with whom we work very closely.

Mr. Trump has made it clear China is a top priority. Are you concerned that a Trump administration will push NATO into a more confrontational situation with China?

NATO states have discussed China at length. We see it producing more and more weaponry, and they have a couple of Chinese companies in the top ten of the biggest worldwide defence companies, whereas ten years ago they had none. They are ramping up their defence industrial production and defence industrial base.

They are also—through double use and sanctions circumvention—supporting Russia's war effort in Ukraine and working together with North Korea and Iran to help Russia in its war effort. In return, Russia is giving missile technology to North Korea or money to Iran, which then goes to support Hezbollah, Hamas and other proxies in the Middle East.

So, we see all this as interconnected when you look at what China is doing. And whereas in the past, we would focus more on Russia, more and more NATO is realising China's role and how we need to defend ourselves against this.

European countries need to ramp up their defence industrial production. Compared to Russia and China, we are not producing enough.

NATO Secretary General, Mark Rutte

What will the NATO-Russia relationship look like in the coming months and years?

When I attended my first NATO summit in 2010, in Lisbon, We had a NATO-Russia council and President (Dmitry) Medvedev was in the room with us. Putin, at the time, was prime minister. Today, I cannot think of a meeting with President Putin in The Hague or participating in a NATO summit.

Obviously, things are very different now. Putin was the one after the Sochi Winter Olympics who invaded Crimea and started to invade the eastern oblasts of Ukraine, Luhansk and Donetsk. He changed that whole relationship, and we had to react to that. Then, of course, in February 2022, he started his full onslaught on Ukraine. This means that there is no relationship; things are now totally different. Russia is still there geographically, so we still have to think about what a NATO-Russia coexistence would look like in the longer term. But things now look so much different than in 2010.

What about Europe's security and defence policy? Now, there are more voices. France and more European countries are pushing for a more independent European policy—one that doesn't rely on America as much.

I am very happy that the EU senior leadership team, including (Andrius) Kubilius and (Kaja) Kallas, a colleague of mine when she was prime minister of Estonia, are all in very senior positions, and I think we all agree. I will see Kabilius soon, but I know all the others. We have had long talks already, and we continue those talks; we agree that we have to work together in the EU and NATO.

But everybody understands there shouldn't be dual structures. It has to be complimentary, and NATO is extremely good at setting the standards. EU is a soft power with internal market rules that can help ramp up defence progression and all that. In that sense, I think we can really be complimentary.

Do you think Germany, the UK, and France will play a bigger leading role within NATO in the coming years?

They already play a big role because they are the three biggest economies on the European side of NATO, next to Canada, and the US on the American side. And, of course, we should add Italy because it also has a big economy, Spain, and the Netherlands.

Of course, these three are very important allies, but I would not say they will play a bigger role; they will play the big role they have always played. I very much welcome that in the EU, the senior leadership team is really thinking about how they can ramp up defence progression, make sure that we are protected in terms of missile defence, but at the same time not replicating what NATO is doing because it does not make sense to have new head offices, new command structure and even more senior generals. We should make use of the senior military people we already have.

And finally, I wanted to ask your view on the dangers of AI in terrorism. Does NATO have a policy on this?

In NATO, we have leading in-house thinkers but are also connected to leading academia on such emerging technologies and their positive and negative impacts. This is a core task of NATO, and we are in total agreement. In fact, President (Recep Tayyip) Erdogan of Turkey always reminds me, "Hey Mark, do not forget that NATO is also about fighting terrorism." Yes, I know; I totally agree with you because that is a core task of NATO.

+ / -