Ben Hodges - Commanding General, United States Army Europe

Download Subtitles

Transcript

:00:00. > :00:20.Now it's Hardtalk with Stephen Sackur.

:00:21. > :00:29.Welcome to a special edition of HARDtalk from western Poland where

:00:30. > :00:33.forces for more than 20 Nato countries have joined the host

:00:34. > :00:38.country for what is the biggest military exercise on European soil

:00:39. > :00:44.since the end of the Cold War. And it comes at a sensitive time with

:00:45. > :00:49.east European nations increasingly nervous about the intentions of

:00:50. > :00:54.Russia's president Vladimir Putin. My guest today is the outspoken

:00:55. > :01:09.commander of the US army in Europe, General Ben Hodges. Is Nato ready to

:01:10. > :01:16.respond to any Russian threat? Swooping over the plains of

:01:17. > :01:18.north-west Poland, on the ground and elaborate wargame simulating an

:01:19. > :01:25.invasion of Nato is mangled eastern flank. General Hodges, this is a

:01:26. > :01:30.little map of Europe that you travel with, and when you look at this,

:01:31. > :01:35.what do you see? It is useful to appreciate the geography, the fact

:01:36. > :01:38.that the Russians had access up to the Baltic Sea means they have

:01:39. > :01:42.access to countries up to France. What I also take from this note is

:01:43. > :01:47.that Poland is tricky to Lee and extraordinarily important place.

:01:48. > :01:55.Geographically it is like a keystone if you will from the top end of the

:01:56. > :02:03.alliance, at Estonia down to Bulgaria, as far as this border, so

:02:04. > :02:06.you are right. No matter a crisis in Romania or Estonia, you will pass

:02:07. > :02:14.through the airspace and on the ground. Operation Anaconda was a

:02:15. > :02:18.10-day exercise designed to show Nato's rapid response capability.

:02:19. > :02:26.Hundreds of paratroopers were airdropped into the fight. Heavy

:02:27. > :02:36.armour roared across the Polish plains. And infantry showcased their

:02:37. > :02:39.urban warfare training. Nato has 28 members. They use different

:02:40. > :02:45.equipment, train differently, speak different languages and they face to

:02:46. > :02:51.the east a Russian leadership ready and willing to flex its military

:02:52. > :02:54.muscle. Across the eastern border the Russians will be watching this.

:02:55. > :02:59.The Russians say when Nato puts these big, big exercises on pretty

:03:00. > :03:06.close to our doorstep it is nothing more than a provocation. No. Our

:03:07. > :03:09.president said we will defend all Nato allies. The best way to prevent

:03:10. > :03:14.crisis from happening is to show that you are ready. And so this

:03:15. > :03:17.exercise is part of showing that we are going to do what it takes to be

:03:18. > :03:24.prepared. When I see the big-screen presentation from the Polish

:03:25. > :03:30.commander here, talking at about the red enemy, talking about the red

:03:31. > :03:34.enemy taking the Baltic states and operating hybrid warfare tactics in

:03:35. > :03:40.northern Poland, you know, it does seem to be a pretty clear, blatant

:03:41. > :03:44.message to Moscow that you believe that is on Moscow's agenda. I think

:03:45. > :03:51.political leaders all over the alliance have been saying that. I

:03:52. > :03:56.mean, Russia has changed the security environment. Invaded

:03:57. > :04:00.Georgia, in faded Ukraine. They scare the hell out of people in the

:04:01. > :04:05.Baltics and in Poland -- invaded. Every country I go to that was a

:04:06. > :04:12.former Soviet republic or a former Warsaw Pact member or is a neighbour

:04:13. > :04:17.of Russia absolutely believes that this is a very real possibility. Do

:04:18. > :04:22.you believe it? I absolutely believe it is a possibility. They only

:04:23. > :04:26.respect to strength. And defensive strength is exactly what Operation

:04:27. > :04:32.Anaconda was designed to showcase. The Germans and the Brits built a

:04:33. > :04:40.bridge over this river. Nato wants Moscow to see this and be deterred

:04:41. > :04:43.by it. The generals declared fair wargame a success but there is no

:04:44. > :04:48.disguising the nervousness in Eastern Europe. There is a very

:04:49. > :04:51.strong whiff of public relations about everything that's happening

:04:52. > :04:57.here. The Polish government is very keen to deliver two clear messages.

:04:58. > :05:03.One is that they are doing their bit to secure Europe's eastern flank but

:05:04. > :05:10.number two is desperately wanting the Americans to stay committed to

:05:11. > :05:14.Nato. Poland is one of the few countries to meet Nato's target on

:05:15. > :05:20.military spending. But post the Ukraine crisis, Warsaw feels

:05:21. > :05:25.vulnerable. I think most other countries which are on the eastern

:05:26. > :05:31.border of the Nato would like to have the Americans, Brits and other

:05:32. > :05:36.forces on their territories. So we are not the exception from the other

:05:37. > :05:40.countries on the east border of Nato... When you say to the

:05:41. > :05:47.Americans, we would like you to station permanent forces here, what

:05:48. > :05:52.do they say to you? Of course, if we discuss the military, so there is

:05:53. > :06:01.not any problem. At the final decision depends as always on the

:06:02. > :06:04.politicians. -- but. This massive exercise was brought to a close with

:06:05. > :06:13.Brave words about readiness and resolve. But Nato's 28 members are

:06:14. > :06:16.beset with economic and political difficulties -- brave. The security

:06:17. > :06:23.threats facing Europe are changing fast. And the alliance is struggling

:06:24. > :06:29.to keep up. General Ben Hodges, welcome to HARDtalk. Thank you. Are

:06:30. > :06:33.you ready to tell me where you think the weaknesses are in Nato's

:06:34. > :06:37.capability today? You must have learned a lot from the last 10- 12

:06:38. > :06:43.days. Where are you worried right now? The thing I worry about most is

:06:44. > :06:46.freedom of movement. Russians are able to move huge formations and

:06:47. > :06:55.lots of equipment a long distance very fast. They are snap exercises

:06:56. > :06:59.that they do I personally am surprised each time they do it --

:07:00. > :07:02.their snap. And so you can see why that scares me. You mean about the

:07:03. > :07:06.speed and scale they can bring to bear? 20,000 troops and a lot of

:07:07. > :07:11.Whitman shows up on the border of a Nato country or maybe somewhere like

:07:12. > :07:16.Georgia or Ukraine that is concerning -- equipment. The

:07:17. > :07:20.Russians have what we call freedom of movement on interior lines. They

:07:21. > :07:24.can move anywhere inside Russia as fast as they want. In order for our

:07:25. > :07:30.political leaders to have options other than the liberation campaign,

:07:31. > :07:36.we need to match that same speed inside Nato. You don't have that

:07:37. > :07:38.speed today. No. We need what I would call a military Schengen zone

:07:39. > :07:43.that would allow the military to move inside, a British convoy, a

:07:44. > :07:50.German or American convoy should be able to go anywhere inside Nato in

:07:51. > :07:54.order to have the same freedom of movement. I am talking about three

:07:55. > :07:59.days, three days' notification we ought to be able to do and we don't

:08:00. > :08:03.have it right now. I think it is a necessary part of this deterrent

:08:04. > :08:06.that the alliance is shifting from a sure to deterrence. You are saying

:08:07. > :08:11.right now and in a frank way that right now you don't have deterrence

:08:12. > :08:15.because the enemy, that's what you have called the Russians, they know

:08:16. > :08:23.you can't do that. Deterrence is in the mind of the potential adversary,

:08:24. > :08:28.obviously. I am uneasy about my ability to assemble quickly or for

:08:29. > :08:31.others to assemble quickly, and so I will try to continue explaining why

:08:32. > :08:36.it matters. It is not for our convenience. It is for the ability

:08:37. > :08:40.to give political leaders options short of having to do and liberation

:08:41. > :08:45.campaign. You have set in the recent past we have a grave lack of combat

:08:46. > :08:49.aviation. You have also talked of the weaknesses in terms of

:08:50. > :08:52.intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance capability. At one

:08:53. > :09:00.point you said we have no short-range air defence any more.

:09:01. > :09:04.Things that shoot down UAVs, you go from Patriot missiles to an M4

:09:05. > :09:07.rifle. There is nothing in between. You are a guy who is exposing the

:09:08. > :09:15.weaknesses of your own site. I think I have a duty to make sure that our

:09:16. > :09:22.policymakers and planners understand clearly exactly where we are --

:09:23. > :09:26.side. Now, these are all decisions that have to be made, priority is to

:09:27. > :09:30.be made. The US army is continuing to shrink. These are political

:09:31. > :09:35.decisions based on budget. From your point of view are they the wrong

:09:36. > :09:39.decisions? I don't have enough capacity to do everything that needs

:09:40. > :09:44.to be done, but my army chief has said that. You don't have enough

:09:45. > :09:47.capacity? A previous supreme commander has said that. We need

:09:48. > :09:53.combat aviation. We need short-range air defence. We need long-range

:09:54. > :09:58.fires. This is an extraordinary thing you are telling me. It is not

:09:59. > :10:02.news. The army leadership has been saying this same thing... That is

:10:03. > :10:05.the point, General. Senior top brass have been saying it month upon

:10:06. > :10:11.month, year upon year and it hasn't been delivered. I think it is. It

:10:12. > :10:14.will never be as fast as I would like to see. My country has spent

:10:15. > :10:23.$3.4 billion bringing equipment back in to Europe. As a response to what

:10:24. > :10:28.we see as a threat that wasn't there - we didn't see it, I didn't see it

:10:29. > :10:31.that way until they went into Ukraine. When Russia went into

:10:32. > :10:36.Ukraine that is when it became very real. In the great scheme of things,

:10:37. > :10:40.it is actually a significant step by my government. I would put it to you

:10:41. > :10:47.that your east European partners within Nato want a whole lot more

:10:48. > :10:49.than you are giving them. The Obama administration talk about

:10:50. > :10:52.reassurance and the reassurance initiative by putting one brigade

:10:53. > :11:00.back into Europe isn't going to do it. The Polish President has made it

:11:01. > :11:02.plain that he wants to see US forces permanently based, permanently

:11:03. > :11:10.based, in Eastern Europe. Is that going to happen? I think what we

:11:11. > :11:14.will see coming out of Warsaw is specifics on which nation is going

:11:15. > :11:20.to do what with these enhanced forward presence battalions. The

:11:21. > :11:25.Secretary General recently made the announcement that there would be an

:11:26. > :11:30.increase in Nato troops that are in Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and

:11:31. > :11:37.Poland. Permanently based US forces? There will be a rotational presence.

:11:38. > :11:42.Ah, rotation. Again, president Duda, we do not want to be a buffer zone,

:11:43. > :11:46.we want to be the real eastern flank of this alliance, and by that he

:11:47. > :11:50.means, we don't want forces in West Germany or somewhere else which can

:11:51. > :11:54.be in emergency centre wards us and it will take days to get there. We

:11:55. > :11:59.actually want real commitment, men and material on our territory. My

:12:00. > :12:03.President has said we will defend all of our Nato allies. That has

:12:04. > :12:09.never been in question. What if they don't believe any more? I think they

:12:10. > :12:16.do and we will continue to exercise here. We are going to continue to do

:12:17. > :12:18.things that improve the overall collective security of this most

:12:19. > :12:25.successful alliance in the history of the world. Part of what makes

:12:26. > :12:30.Nato - I am speaking to you as a US army officer, US Army Europe - but

:12:31. > :12:36.of course we are the contribution to Nato from the US, part of that, it

:12:37. > :12:42.is a collective security alliance. 28 nations. Not every one of the

:12:43. > :12:46.same threats. If you are in France, Italy, Spain or grease you are

:12:47. > :12:54.seeing massive immigration problem and Islamic extremism as the main

:12:55. > :12:59.threat. The alliance is not about just lining up all of our troops on

:13:00. > :13:05.the border with Belarus or Russia or in Ukraine, it is about collective

:13:06. > :13:10.security -- Greece. So, positioning decisions that our leaders will make

:13:11. > :13:14.over the next few weeks will reflect that and maintaining the unity of

:13:15. > :13:19.the lines. President Putin's number one objective is absolutely to

:13:20. > :13:22.terror apart the unity of our alliance, so decisions will be made

:13:23. > :13:24.that point be ideal for every country but they will be their best

:13:25. > :13:28.to maintain the unity of the alliance. That's what I believe. You

:13:29. > :13:35.say Putin wants to tear apart the alliance. He cannot stand the

:13:36. > :13:38.alliance. Do you, as a very experienced infantrymen, general,

:13:39. > :13:42.now the head of US army in Europe, do you believe that the Russians

:13:43. > :13:48.over the next, say, five years, have a game plan to a certain military

:13:49. > :13:54.presence, frankly, to undertake military aggression against the

:13:55. > :14:00.Baltic states or other parts of the western backed eastern flank? I

:14:01. > :14:09.think they started in 2007 with a modernisation effort, and with a

:14:10. > :14:18.mobilisation effort to be in a place where they have the capability to

:14:19. > :14:22.conduct any sort of operation to assert influence, whether it is

:14:23. > :14:29.against a perceived provocation, which I don't believe that is their

:14:30. > :14:33.narrative, or to a Serb-controlled and influence over what they think

:14:34. > :14:38.is their rightful sphere -- or to assert. Andrew Monaghan from Chatham

:14:39. > :14:42.House has done a lot of good work is planning this mobilisation not in

:14:43. > :14:46.the old sense of mobilising troops but of all the institutions of

:14:47. > :14:51.government as well as forces being at a level of readiness and

:14:52. > :14:57.modernisation that would enable them to conduct sustained operations.

:14:58. > :15:03.This is also within the context of hybrid warfare. It won't be like

:15:04. > :15:06.what I grew up against in the 80s, long lines of Russian tanks and a

:15:07. > :15:11.massive assault and artillery like that. Although that could be part of

:15:12. > :15:18.it. Instead, if there is ever a crisis it will be within a nasty

:15:19. > :15:23.cyber environment, misinformation, all elements of national power,

:15:24. > :15:27.information, economic, as well is military.

:15:28. > :15:33.We have seen over recent months a series of worrying incidents. We

:15:34. > :15:38.have seen US naval vessels being buzzed by Russian aircraft, very

:15:39. > :15:44.close. We have seen incidents in Scandinavia or enjoy involved naval

:15:45. > :15:50.vessels. There is a sense in which the Russians appear to be pushing

:15:51. > :15:57.the envelope. Do you fear there is a real possibility may be inadvertent

:15:58. > :16:03.military confrontation between Nato, Western forces, and Russian forces

:16:04. > :16:10.in this neighbourhood? We sure are concerned about that. During the

:16:11. > :16:13.Cold War it was common that submarines and aircraft shadowed

:16:14. > :16:16.each other. But there was almost an unwritten protocol about what was

:16:17. > :16:24.acceptable, because everybody wanted to avoid a midair collision, or

:16:25. > :16:27.submarines bumping into each other, and all the negative things that

:16:28. > :16:36.would come out of that. What seems a bit different this time, recently,

:16:37. > :16:42.is what I would describe as the unprofessional, to fly that close to

:16:43. > :16:47.aircraft, to do certain manoeuvres. I'm in infantry soldier so I'm not

:16:48. > :16:50.an expert on flying or maritime operations, but even a pedestrian

:16:51. > :16:55.observer can tell that this is very unsafe. Russia wants to be treated

:16:56. > :17:00.like a global superpower, they should act responsibly. And that is

:17:01. > :17:04.not responsible. What is extraordinary is to reflect upon the

:17:05. > :17:09.fact that in 2012 the Obama administration took a strategic

:17:10. > :17:15.decision to draw down, significantly drawdown, US forces in Europe. I

:17:16. > :17:19.think we all thought Russia was going to be a partner. That was

:17:20. > :17:23.certainly the hope of this administration, previous

:17:24. > :17:29.administrations. You remember President Bush meeting with

:17:30. > :17:35.President Putin? I remember Russian soldiers being with us when we went

:17:36. > :17:41.into to enforce the Dayton peace accords. So, for years you got it

:17:42. > :17:48.wrong? No, but what I am saying is that Russia has changed. They had an

:17:49. > :17:53.opportunity, a seat at the table. But somewhere, 2008, the invasion of

:17:54. > :17:59.Georgia, the use of force to change the border of Ukraine, the things

:18:00. > :18:06.that they are doing on their periphery, that is what has changed.

:18:07. > :18:11.So, the alliance is responding, the US is responding to that. Today, you

:18:12. > :18:17.see Russia as the enemy, right? I see it as the only potential threat

:18:18. > :18:22.that can destroy it the US or the UK or Germany or any other country,

:18:23. > :18:26.because of their nuclear force. They talk about nuclear weapons a lot, in

:18:27. > :18:31.exercises they have threatened Denmark, Sweden, Poland and

:18:32. > :18:35.Scandinavia as being nuclear targets. But that doesn't mean they

:18:36. > :18:39.are going to do it. There is a difference between having the

:18:40. > :18:43.capability to destroy the US. Islamic State have said they hate

:18:44. > :18:48.everything about us, they want to destroy the US, the UK, France. They

:18:49. > :18:54.don't have the ability to do it. We will be dealing with them for

:18:55. > :19:01.decades. Let's stick with Putin for now. It seems to me that the context

:19:02. > :19:09.in which we talk, that is that a generation ago 300,000 US troops

:19:10. > :19:12.were stationed in Europe, and today pretty much 30,000. That has sent an

:19:13. > :19:16.extraordinary message to the Russians. It has told the Russians

:19:17. > :19:24.that the US government no longer has the will or the intention of

:19:25. > :19:27.investing in the security of Europe. Obviously are completely disagree

:19:28. > :19:33.with you on that. The fact is, we are bringing equipment and troops

:19:34. > :19:36.back into Europe. Our government has made it clear to our allies that

:19:37. > :19:41.they have a responsibility to take on more of a share, and frankly the

:19:42. > :19:49.allies are stepping up. But they are not, are they? Of course they are.

:19:50. > :19:54.At the Wales summit all the parties agreed that they would begin to take

:19:55. > :19:58.on more responsibility, and the most well-known metric of the 2% of GDP.

:19:59. > :20:04.How many of those countries are meeting that target? Today I think

:20:05. > :20:10.we are at five. Out of 28? They gave themselves 20 years to do that, so

:20:11. > :20:13.we are not even two years on. Keep that in mind. I think a number that

:20:14. > :20:19.are either in increasing or have stopped the decline is something

:20:20. > :20:25.like 28. I appreciate that you need to be, in terms of sending signals

:20:26. > :20:28.to Moscow, you need to be a guy who is talking about a glass half full,

:20:29. > :20:34.not half empty. But you yourself said not long ago, my task right now

:20:35. > :20:38.is to make 30,000 US troops look and feel like 300,000. That is the best

:20:39. > :20:43.you can do Vladimir Putin will not be impressed by that. I think he is

:20:44. > :20:47.impressed so far. Our 30,000 of course is what is stationed here.

:20:48. > :20:51.Creating opportunities in the way the U.S. Army has responded by

:20:52. > :20:56.providing more reserve component forces to come over for exercises.

:20:57. > :21:01.The fact that $3.4 billion has been spent just next year, if the

:21:02. > :21:05.Congress approves it, to improve training and capability. We are

:21:06. > :21:13.responding, but I have seen the UK, of course, has maintained that 2%.

:21:14. > :21:17.They will be the lead nation for the joint task force next year. You say

:21:18. > :21:21.the UK is one of the most staunch loyal partners. They are cutting,

:21:22. > :21:28.the Cameron government is committed to cutting the army size from

:21:29. > :21:40.roughly 100,000 a couple of years ago, down to 80000 x 20 20. When you

:21:41. > :21:47.see that sort of cut, does it worry you? Every army chief has to balance

:21:48. > :21:51.three competing requirements. The size of the force, the readiness of

:21:52. > :21:57.the force, and the modernisation of the force. And so, if you have an

:21:58. > :22:01.army that is at a certain size in order to maintain that structure you

:22:02. > :22:04.have to rob from your own modernisation accounts or maybe from

:22:05. > :22:11.the readiness accounts, which means training, maintenance and so on. So

:22:12. > :22:19.what matters to me is less the size, and more the quality and capability.

:22:20. > :22:24.Chief of General staff Nick Carter is one of the most innovative

:22:25. > :22:27.officers I've ever known, and he is figuring out with whatever structure

:22:28. > :22:33.he has, how does he make sure it is organised to deliver the effect?

:22:34. > :22:36.That maybe so, but independent analysts are looking at it and they

:22:37. > :22:41.don't like what they see. Chatham House has said there is a real of UK

:22:42. > :22:44.military ability being hollowed out. The former defence secretary in the

:22:45. > :22:48.US, a guy that you obviously know very well, he has said if the cuts

:22:49. > :22:53.go through the UK can no longer be regarded as a full spectrum military

:22:54. > :23:01.partner. There is real concern, isn't that? None of us has enough.

:23:02. > :23:05.No country has enough land forces to do everything they have been asked

:23:06. > :23:10.to do. There is a school of thought in your country, and maybe the

:23:11. > :23:15.loudest express Rip that is Donald Trump, the presumptive Republican

:23:16. > :23:18.nominee, that in his world Nato is obsolete and it is not really needed

:23:19. > :23:26.any more, and the US need be investing huge amounts of money and

:23:27. > :23:30.material in Nato any more. The economic relationship between the US

:23:31. > :23:39.and the EU is about five times more than it is anywhere else in the

:23:40. > :23:42.world. So, for no other reason than stability and prosperity in Europe

:23:43. > :23:47.affects our own stability and security. Our strong list allies

:23:48. > :23:50.come from Europe, as well as Australia and Canada. We have

:23:51. > :23:53.learned that we don't have the capacity to do anything by

:23:54. > :23:59.ourselves, we will always need allies, partners, and Europe is

:24:00. > :24:04.where they come from. Common values, shared collective security

:24:05. > :24:09.commitments, I think that has survived for almost 70 years and I

:24:10. > :24:16.actually feel that we are going to be able to continue that. General

:24:17. > :24:42.Brad -- Dan Hodges, thank you for joining us.

:24:43. > :24:46.It is the 20th of June, and since it is a leap year,

:24:47. > :24:47.that means it is the summer solstice.

:24:48. > :24:50.It might not feel very summary, but we will have 17 hours

:24:51. > :24:53.It also coincides with the strawberry moon,

:24:54. > :24:57.the full moon marking the start of the strawberry season.