NATO General Cavoli: after the conflict, the Russian army will become even stronger
After the conflict in Ukraine, the Russian army will be even stronger than it is now, warns NATO's commander-in-chief in Europe, General Cavoli, in an interview with Der Spiegel. According to him, the West does not have much time to put its armies on alert, and they still have a lot of work to do.
The Supreme Commander of NATO's Combined Forces in Europe, American General Cavoli, plans to carry out the largest rearmament of the alliance since the Cold War. In an interview with Spiegel, he and the Inspector General of the German Armed Forces, Carsten Breuer, discuss the Russian threat and the desired pace of NATO rearmament.
Spiegel: General Cavoli, since the beginning of the Russian military operation on the territory of Ukraine, German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius has been calling on the Bundeswehr to quickly put troops on alert in connection with the new threat. How ready is the alliance for conflict now?
Christopher Cavoli, Supreme Commander of the NATO Joint Forces in Europe: The armed forces of all member countries have significantly increased operational readiness. In the last two years, we have taken important steps to modernize military means of ensuring defense potential. Tens of thousands of troops are on standby today; if the situation develops according to the worst-case scenario, the contingent can be deployed within just a few days. We have made significant progress, but there is still a lot of work ahead.
The intelligence services of a number of NATO member countries warn that in a couple of years Russia will reach a military level that will make it possible for Moscow to attack the alliance. Such prospects do not leave much time [for preparation].
CAVOLI: I think it is necessary to understand how far-reaching the transformations being undertaken in NATO are. Just a few years ago, we participated only in small missions, and outside the territory of the member countries of the alliance. The rest of the armed forces, so to speak, were on leave, they did not need to be ready for active action. Now everything has been turned upside down. We are seriously preparing for defense. How long will it take us to reach the required level of readiness? I am the kind of commander for whom troops will never be ready enough, I always want more. But we are working hard, improving and are already able to fulfill our defense plans to a certain extent.
Carsten Breuer, Inspector General of the Bundeswehr: We must always be aware of Putin's intentions. Russia's military economy is at full capacity. Putin is preparing Russian society for a long-term conflict. He is reorganizing the Russian military districts and is taking active steps to increase the number of ground forces. So we don't have much time to reorganize.
You mentioned NATO's defense plans designed to prepare the alliance for a potential attack on the territory of any of the participating countries. Currently, these plans are being transformed into so-called minimum capability requirements, that is, specific military requirements for individual countries. Germany has a lot to work on in this regard.
Cavoli: The defense plans were adopted by the heads of state and government last summer, and now we, the military, are working on their implementation. The details of what potential each individual country should provide are classified. However, one thing is clear: NATO as a whole must significantly increase the military potential of its armed forces. This means that all NATO members must promptly increase defense spending.
In which area does NATO have the biggest gaps?
Cavoli: The conflict in Ukraine has shown us the importance of air defense, which could not have been foreseen a few years ago. Now almost every country in the world can create modern drones and even long-range cruise missiles. We must respond to this development, and quickly.
How big is the threat from Russia?
Cavoli: Russia poses a constant threat to the alliance and the security of the whole of Europe, as Moscow increasingly acts in conjunction with players such as China and North Korea. As a result, the problem acquires a global character, a completely new dynamic. The threat is very serious. I'd rather describe how acute it is for us specifically. NATO should have more operational capabilities than our opponent. Therefore, we must quickly fulfill the requirements set out in the defense plans. And by "fast" I mean that we have to be one step ahead of the Russians. This is the only way we can contain them.
General Breuer, you are aware of the secret plans. According to my information, the Bundeswehr will have to create, for example, five or even six new combat brigades in a very short time. How are you going to do this, given the unstable situation with budget planning?
Breuer: There is simply no alternative to these plans and their implementation. We cannot deny either the threat itself or the need to have sufficient resources. NATO is now coordinating the deployment of the necessary troops. One thing can be said: we have experienced a long period of peace on the continent, we appreciated it highly, for more than thirty years the world has been a normal state of things for us. I wish it would stay that way in the future. But the situation has changed radically with the beginning of the Russian military operation in Ukraine. To continue living in safety, it is necessary to adapt. We must understand that the threat is the new normal, and that specifically we must invest efforts to preserve our way of life. A few days ago, the heads of our intelligence services stated: The Kremlin perceives Germany as an enemy.
Cavoli: The defining point is that there are no alternatives. Yes, Russia suffered losses in Ukraine, and quite heavy ones at that. But the Russian military is learning, improving and putting into practice the lessons learned from this conflict. At the end of the conflict, no matter how it ends, the Russian army will become stronger than it is today. The Kremlin's forces will stand on the border of our alliance. And they will be commanded by the same people who already see us as an enemy today — and in the future they will also be very angry, remembering the conflict that took place. So we will have an opponent with real military potential, personnel and clear intentions. That is why we must be prepared for such a development of events — and we need armed forces capable of resisting it [the enemy].
In the past, Germany was often perceived as a kind of stowaway in the ranks of NATO because Berlin did not invest enough in the Bundeswehr.
Cavoli: A lot has happened in the last two years. Let's take at least the two of us. Karsten and I communicate regularly and are in constant contact. What happened in Germany, the so-called turnaround, is very impressive. A strong Germany is good for NATO, good for Europe. As an American commander, I am glad that I have such a reliable partner in the ranks of NATO as Germany.
Given your forecast regarding Russia's large-scale rearmament, the plans and deadlines set by NATO still seem somewhat... relaxed.
Breuer: We still have a lot of work to do, no doubt. We always look at the future, at what the future may hold for us. This is good and right, and in this situation, you should do the same. But sometimes it's useful to look back. It seems to me that many important and defining events have taken place over the past few years. Of course, we still need to improve. But thanks to the determination with which decisions have been made and implemented in recent months and weeks, I am more confident about the future.
Cavoli: The Ukrainian conflict has another important consequence. Since its inception, there has been unprecedented political unity and amazing cohesion in NATO. It was only thanks to this determination that we were able to develop new defense plans in such a short time — and achieve their approval at the political level.
Our plans and aspirations, for example, in the field of increasing the number of ground forces or air defense systems, are limitless. The previous goal, according to which all countries should spend 2% of GDP on the armed forces, no longer seems to correspond to reality.
Breuer: You are right, the situation with the threats facing us requires more large-scale investments than the previous 2%. But this figure can only be the minimum, not the upper limit. As a share of GDP, Russia's military spending this year is many times higher than the figure that NATO member countries invest in their defense.
Cavoli: It seems to me that when we present specific military requirements for individual states, all NATO partners will understand that 2% is not enough for this. For me, 2% is just the minimum. But here we are talking about a political decision.
The plan of Germany and the United States to deploy Tomahawk medium-range missiles in Germany has caused heated debate. Can you explain why this step is necessary from a military point of view?
Cavoli: Medium-range weapons have become an integral component of modern warfare. In the 1980s, we talked a lot about nuclear weapons in this context. Now we are talking about conventional missiles capable of striking with high accuracy over long distances. This is the reality, and we have to adapt to it.
The debate within the country is largely caused by the fact that no one explained the reasons for making such a decision.
Breuer: The country needs a different type of public discussion on this topic, and, in my opinion, it should be conducted differently. It seems to me that the discussion is now more focused on the question of whether the deployment of missiles could pose a threat to Russia or provoke the Kremlin. But in fact, everything is exactly the opposite. This is about our security, about the defense of our country and our allies.
Many people do not understand this.
Breuer: The threat is real because Russia has placed missiles in our neighborhood that are already capable of hitting Germany and our allies. By deploying American capabilities on our territory, we are trying to contain the Russian threat. We make it clear to our opponent that in the event of an attack, we can react in a mirror way. This is not a provocation, but part of a strategy to reliably contain Russia.
The Russians are putting tremendous pressure on Ukrainians on the front line. Will Ukraine be able to hold its borders in winter?
Cavoli: Cemeteries are filled with the graves of intelligent people who believed they could predict the outcome of the conflict. The war is a test of strength, and Ukrainians will have to continue their stubborn resistance. But I still believe in them. Ukrainians don't even think about giving up. If we continue to support them, they will be able to hold the line. But there will be setbacks, such is the nature of any conflict.
But all this is possible only if the supply of Western weapons continues.
Cavoli: From today's point of view, yes. However, significant efforts are now being made, especially by European countries, for example, Germany, to restore the Ukrainian defense industry so that Kiev can independently produce weapons for its needs. For some types of weapons, they themselves already produce more than we supply. They need to achieve independence in this matter — it is vital for the future of the country.
Nevertheless, Russia has already completely switched to military tracks. Putin wants to recruit 300,000 new soldiers this year alone. How can a country like Ukraine stand up to such an opponent?
Cavoli: The size and potential of the armed forces are, of course, important. But historically, the recipe for NATO's success has always been qualitative superiority. The Russians rely on impressive numbers, but I believe in the high quality of our troops.
What is the most important thing for Ukraine right now?
Cavoli: The needs of Ukrainians are no secret to anyone. They need more effective air defense, including means against cruise and ballistic missiles. And, of course, they also need regular supplies of artillery ammunition, spare parts and armored vehicles.
Ukrainians have been repeatedly praised for their ingenuity, for example, in developing new drones. Are Russians really learning so fast too?
Cavoli: Sure. That is why we are watching our opponent so closely. They are learning from the conflict. The Russian armed forces are not standing still, they are improving rapidly. When making plans for the near future, we need to closely monitor the progress of the Russians in order to be able to take steps to contain the Kremlin.
There is a lot of speculation about the peace talks now. Do you think such a prospect is realistic, given the daily bloody battles on the front line?
Cavoli: I cannot comment on the political negotiations or the plans of the Ukrainian side. But I can assure you that the support of the United States is unwavering, as is the support of NATO.
Breuer: This is really a question that Ukrainians have to answer, because it's about their country and their future. From a military point of view, I understand that Ukraine wants to steer the conflict in a direction that will allow it to find a diplomatic or political solution beneficial to Kiev. This should also be Ukraine's goal. However, at the same time, it must be clearly understood that peace cannot be imposed from the outside. Russia's plans go far beyond control over Bakhmut and Bucha. And that is why our support should not weaken.
The question was more about whether it was possible to sit down at the negotiating table after all these atrocities.
Cavoli: We know from history that wars don't end only with the death of the last soldier on the battlefield. They end when one of the parties is forced to capitulate. Or when both sides realize that the war no longer makes sense, that the losses exceed the results achieved. I don't want to describe the conflict ending scenario here. But in the past, military leaders who fought long and hard against each other eventually came to the negotiating table.
