Ex-NATO boss: “What Putin told me behind closed doors” Ex-NATO boss: “What Putin told me behind closed doors”

With winter, the war enters a new phase. Which side will benefit more from falling temperatures?

Anders Fogh Rasmussen: The fighting won’t slow down because of the cold weather and frozen ground. Many experts are wrong about that. The Ukrainians are determined to keep fighting after their successes. Contrary to what Putin may think, his terror will never break the will of the Ukrainians. He failed at the beginning of the war and will not succeed now. Putin has miscalculated again.

Recently, the Russian president promised peace talks. Should Ukraine respond?

Putin doesn’t take that seriously. It’s a trap – he wants to use the break to regroup.

What needs to happen before Putin actually comes to the negotiating table?

This war will be decided on the battlefield – not at the negotiating table. As long as Russian soldiers are on Ukrainian territory, there will always be a conflict. Ukrainians will never accept losing part of their land to the Russians. But the resistance is a huge tour de force. Every day, more than 100 Russian missiles and drones land across the country, destroying vital infrastructure. We are facing a humanitarian catastrophe.

However, the West seems less united than at the beginning of the war. Can the disaster be prevented at all?

We need to adjust our strategy. Putin further escalated the war on October 10 with his missile and drone strike on Kiev. The West has not responded accordingly. It is now our duty to give the Ukrainians the strongest possible hand so that they can decide for themselves when they are ready for peace talks. That means: we have to provide them with the necessary equipment. The US and Europe must lift all restrictions on arms sales. To achieve that, I am currently holding talks in Washington.

That may be difficult. Prominent Republicans have announced plans to scale back US aid.

Fortunately, I don’t notice that in my conversations. I’ve met some senior Republicans who have pledged their support. They are concerned with getting a better overview of the war material, they do not fundamentally question the supply of weapons.

Nevertheless, war-weariness is evident in the West. Support has also fallen significantly in Switzerland, according to a new survey.

We are all tired of war, I do not deny that. That is precisely why we must do everything we can now to end the conflict quickly. You can only do that with guns. Ukraine needs ammunition, anti-aircraft missiles, long-range missiles and heavy tanks.

Switzerland wants nothing to do with it. The Federal Council does not allow Germany to supply Swiss ammunition for the Gepard tanks to Ukraine.

Switzerland surprised me incredibly – but not in a good way. I don’t understand the government’s decision. We are in an existential struggle between democracy and autocracy – no country in the world can remain neutral. That makes no sense! Switzerland is an established democracy. When our values ​​are attacked by an autocrat, be it Putin or Xi Jinping, there is no escaping it. I was a guest in Zurich in June and felt that many Swiss were clearly on the side of Ukraine. In addition, the government has joined the sanctions of the EU. But ammunition? That’s a taboo.

You talk to yourself in anger.

I just can’t understand why Switzerland, instead of supplying the much-needed ammunition, puts obstacles in front of the Germans. This decision will certainly hurt Switzerland economically. In the future, NATO members will think twice about outsourcing the production of munitions or other war materials to Switzerland.

Now you demand guns and toughness, but the annexation of Crimea took place in 2014, in your last year as Secretary General of NATO. Shouldn’t you have responded then?

As you know, I belong to the hawk camp. So you can assume that I wanted to take a tougher stance on Putin. But that is not always possible because there were also other currents. If we had known how brutal Putin is and that he will compare himself to Peter the Great in 2022, we would certainly have acted differently.

You have met Putin several times, how do you rate him?

Putin is a man who makes rational decisions. He knows his files and is well prepared. His big problem was that before the invasion he received false information from his secret service and therefore made the disastrous decision to go to war. And we’ve made the mistake of not taking him seriously in the past. Do you know what Putin told me behind closed doors? At the NATO summit in 2008, he said in private that he did not see Ukraine as an independent state and that he saw Crimea as part of Russia. If we had taken it seriously at the time, this war might not have happened.

Putin is now openly threatening to use the nuclear bomb, saying it is “not a bluff”. What do you make of it?

This is pure strategy, we don’t have a “mad man scenario” here. He hopes that the West will be intimidated by nuclear blackmail and stop arms deliveries to Ukraine. But that must not happen. Those who give in to such threats are doomed to live under a despot. Putin will not detonate a nuclear bomb and even if I was wrong the Russian military would remove him before he could act. The generals know that if Russia uses tactical nuclear weapons in Ukraine, the response from the Americans and NATO will be so violent that the Russian army will be more or less completely destroyed.

Do you think a general mobilization by Putin is likely?

No, the partial mobilization has already strengthened the opposition in the country. If he sends more people to the front, there could be an uprising.

Is there even a way back for Putin? What if Russia actually loses the war?

I don’t know what happened to him personally. But I am convinced that we have no chance of a better relationship with Russia in the near future. Who can guarantee that a successor will not be even worse than Putin? Russia has shown that deals, whether political or economic, are not reliable. The situation will remain tense for a long time. The only way we can protect Ukraine is to help them build an army that can repel any Russian aggression.

But President Selenski wants more, he is aiming for NATO membership.

That should remain the goal. In the meantime, however, we must ensure the security of Ukraine. That is also in the interest of the West. The Ukrainians are the bulwark against an aggressive Russia.

What went through your mind when you heard about the missile strike in Poland two weeks ago? If it really had been a Russian missile, the NATO alliance cause might have gained a foothold and involved other countries in the war.

I was at home and immediately told my employees that we should wait and not get too hectic. The Pentagon was quick to say it was not a Russian missile. It was important to stay calm.

Would we have been on the brink of WW3 if it had been a Russian missile?

You know, I don’t go through life worrying about the outbreak of World War III. I do not believe that. But we must now learn from the past. The West must stand together – and stand strong against any attack that threatens democratic values. Otherwise the world will fall into darkness.