Georgia College & State University hosted Security, NATO and Defense, a public virtual seminar Sept. 21, featuring Leo Michel from the Atlantic Council’s Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security.
Previously, Michel served as director for NATO Policy in the Office of the Secretary of Defense in the U.S. Department of Defense and in various roles in the Pentagon, including director for non-nuclear arms control, deputy U.S. representative to the U.S.-Russia Bilateral Consultative Commission and deputy director for verification policy.
The seminar was sponsored by Georgia College’s Leadership Programs in collaboration with the CEPA Foundation, a United States public charity. GSCU students, faculty and the public tuned in to hear a short presentation from Michel and a panel discussion between Michel and CEPA Foundation Board of Directors President Harald Leibrecht.
During his talk, Michel presented a slideshow to a virtual American audience and a physical French audience on U.S. assistance in Ukraine and how NATO plays into that assistance. He discussed the model that the United States takes to assist countries but not start outright wars. This model plays into three core measures: assistance, repositioning and increasing forces when needed.
“It’s a means to an end. The end is to get the Russian army to stop and hopefully withdraw from Ukraine, but not provoke a wider war,” Michel said. “We feel strongly enough about Ukraine, at least in the short term, and I believe the short term is going to be years … (and) NATO is not just in the lines between the United States and Canada but is also an alliance among Europeans. It’s very important from a U.S. strategic and political perspective, that we’re not alone.”
From the United States model, Michel moved into discussing NATO’s transatlantic defense. He went over the encouraging signs of this defense, including how other partners outside of NATO have participated in the discussion of Ukraine’s defense, how certain allies within NATO are now increasing their contributions to impact deployed troops in various countries, and how the war in Ukraine has incentivized a deepening relationship between NATO and the European Union as well as the United States relationship with the European Union.
“It’s been a somewhat troubled relationship at the beginning between NATO and the European Union. Some allies in NATO, including sometimes the United States, suspect that ambitions to create a European defense, called a European strategic autonomy, would be at the expense of NATO,” Michel explained.
“The good news is that this is, for the most part, something of the past and experience has taught countries that what they really need to do is to work with the particular members of other organizations from a political and military perspective.”
Michel concluded by discussing challenges he perceives lie ahead for transatlantic defenses, including risks of escalation, problematic defensive guarantees for Ukraine, overall impact on future relations with Russia and what that implicates for arms control, and the question of will transatlantic solidarity extend to dealing with China.
The seminar then moved into a panel discussion between Michel and Leibrecht moderated by CEPA Foundation Director Birte Wassenberg. The panel focused on describing American and European perspectives on different topics related to NATO and the Ukraine. The overarching theme was the relationship between NATO, the United States and Europeans.
Michel said the United States remains very involved with Europe and in building relationships, but explained that assistance varies, however, as every action is typically based on international law, plus there remains a long-standing tension between the U.S. and some European countries.
“I don’t see any reason why Europe would want to exclude the United States, as frankly, (European nations) could not provide that level of military assistance. A number of European countries are somewhat concerned about how much assistance they can give from their own stocks. We’re all in this together but that doesn’t mean that you (Europe) don’t have the capability to do things on your own,” Michel said.
As a German American citizen, Leibrecht offered a European counterpoint, stating the Ukrainian war is a game changer for security politics in Europe. He explained how Germany recognizes it must be diplomatically involved in trying to solve conflict, despite historically being hesitant to provide weapons.
“We say we have a people’s army and every issue concerning our security really has to be discussed in our German society. Now we have situations where we have to decide very fast and Germany can do so, but in (the war with Ukraine) it is a major question of how far we can go and not trigger anything,” Leibrecht said.
“I think in the next few days and weeks, you will see a lot more decisions from our (German) chancellor to provide more weapons. On the other hand, we have also increased our military budget … And I think that’s a move (increasing military budget) which goes through all European countries.”