By Anders Fogh Rasmussen

Barely had I been seated before Vladimir Putin told me that NATO—the organization that I then headed—no longer had any purpose and should be disbanded. “After the end of the Cold War, we dissolved the Warsaw Pact,” he said. “Similarly, you should dissolve NATO. That is a relic from the Cold War.”

During my visit to Moscow in December 2009, I sensed that President Putin was challenging the world order that the U.S. created so successfully after World War II. Beginning in 2014, he invaded Ukraine and launched a military action in Syria.

From my former positions as prime minister of Denmark and secretary-general of NATO, I know how important American leadership is. We desperately need a U.S. president who is able and willing to lead the free world and counter autocrats like President Putin. A president who will lead from the front, not from behind.

The world needs such a policeman if freedom and prosperity are to prevail against the forces of oppression, and the only capable, reliable and desirable candidate for the position is the United States. The presidential elections thus come at a pivotal point in history.

The Middle East is torn by war. In North Africa, Libya has collapsed and become a breeding ground for terrorists. In Eastern Europe, a resurgent Russia has brutally attacked and grabbed land by force from Ukraine. China is flexing its muscles against its neighbors—and the rogue state of North Korea is threatening a nuclear attack.

In this world of interconnections, it has become a cliché to talk about the “global village.“ But right now, the village is burning, and the neighbors are fighting in the light of the flames. Just as we need a policeman to restore order; we need a firefighter to put out the flames of conflict, and a kind of mayor, smart and sensible, to lead the rebuilding.

Only America can play all these roles, because of all world powers, America alone has the credibility to shape sustainable solutions to these challenges. Russia is obsessed with rebuilding the empire the Soviet Union lost. China is still primarily a regional actor. Europe is weak, divided and leaderless. The old powers of Britain and France are simply too small and exhausted to play the global role they once did.

This is not simply about means. It is also about morality. Just as only America has the material greatness to stop the slide into chaos, only America has the moral greatness to do it—not for the sake of power, but for the sake of peace.

Yet the U.S. will only be able to shape the solutions the world needs if its leaders act with conviction. When America retrenches and retreats—if the world even thinks that American restraint reflects a lack of willingness to engage in preventing and resolving conflicts—it leaves a vacuum that will be filled by crooked autocrats across the world.

The Obama administration’s reluctance to lead the world has had serious consequences, and none is graver than the behavior of Mr. Putin. While Europe and the U.S. slept, he launched a ruthless military operation in support of the Assad regime in Syria and tried to present Russia as a global power challenging the U.S. in importance. In Europe, he is trying to carve out a sphere of influence and establish Russia as a regional power capable of diminishing American influence.

These are only a few examples of what is now at stake as autocrats, terrorists and rogue states challenge America’s leadership of the international rules-based order—which was created after World War II and which secured for the world an unprecedented period of peace, progress and prosperity.

The next president must acknowledge this inheritance. American isolationism will not make the U.S. and other freedom-loving countries safer and more prosperous, it will make them less so and unleash a plague of dictators and other oppressors. Above all, American isolationism will threaten the future of the rules-based international world order that has brought freedom and prosperity to so many people.

Mr. Rasmussen, a former prime minister of Denmark and a former secretary-general of NATO, is the author of “The Will to Lead—America’s Indispensable Role in the Global Fight For Freedom,” out this month from HarperCollins/Broadside Books. 

Source: The Wall Street Journal

Rasmussen Global CEO Fabrice Pothier joins Politico’s Jack Blanchard to discuss the war in Ukraine and how to avoid the conflict escalating into full-blown nuclear war.

https://www.politico.eu/podcast/how-to-avoid-a-nuclear-war/

Op Ed by Anders Fogh Rasmussen in The Daily Telegraph, 16th March 2018 — The outrage in Salisbury was not an isolated attack, but one piece in a much bigger puzzle of Vladimir Putin’s so-called hybrid war on the West.

This war involves many tactics, from conventional warfare to cyber-attacks, disinformation campaigns, hacking, election interference and targeted political assassinations. It seeks to systematically weaponise the very basis of our open, democratic societies and the democratic world’s fightback is now long overdue. Following the response to Salisbury, Britain could lead that wider charge.

Hybrid tactics all have the same objective: to confuse, scare and anger; and to divide and weaken the Western transatlantic alliance that has sustained the peaceful post-Second World War order. Almost every member of our alliance has witnessed some form of attack, whether through Russian interference in US, French or Italian elections; information campaigns aimed at stirring up migration tensions in Central Europe; or cyber-attacks such as the one carried out on Denmark’s Defence Ministry.

Of course, in parts of Eastern Europe all of these tactics are deployed on a more regular basis. As a non-staff adviser to President Petro Poroshenko, I have seen how Russia continues to foment a war in Ukraine’s Donbass region – which has cost more than 10,000 lives since it began in 2014. This week marks the fourth anniversary of Russia illegally seizing Ukraine’s Crimean Peninsula – the first forceful redrawing of European borders since the Second World War.

Moscow also carries out regular assassinations, including last summer of a former Russian MP on the streets of Ukraine’s capital – in broad daylight. It actively encourages extremists and launches cyber-attacks, including one in 2017 that closed down ministries, banks, the underground and even hospitals.

Conventional fighting and hybrid tactics are all the same side of the coin: a lull in fighting in Eastern Ukraine often precedes a cyber-attack or assassination in the capital. Ukraine is the front line in this hybrid war, but there are other states, such as Georgia or the Baltics, which regularly confront similar tactics from their neighbour.

The Western alliance therefore faces a common challenge. However, we have seen piecemeal and disjointed responses. There has been a woeful lack of urgency and resources devoted to targeting poisonous narratives and misinformation that seek to distort reality; and a worrying number of states still naively believe that Russia will change its behaviour through dialogue alone.

As someone who has dealt with Putin on many occasions, I am in no doubt that he understands only the language of power. Those states who fear that our actions could escalate the situation must ask themselves whether there is also a cost of inaction, and whether it is the West, or Putin, who is really escalating the situation.

Theresa May’s initial response to the Skripal attack was measured and resolute. However, as important (and perhaps more so) is how the wider transatlantic community responds. The initial signs are positive, but leaders’ statements of recent days must be converted into concrete measures such as extending sanctions against Putin’s acolytes.

While all eyes are on the immediate tactical response, the attack on British soil should also be seen by Britain and her allies as a wake-up call to confront Putin’s hybrid war against us. Britain should now pull together the coalition of freedom-loving allies to devote the resources and manpower needed to generate a joined-up transatlantic response. A response that defends our open societies and actively combats this concerted and cynical effort to undermine our democracy and security from within.

Whatever differences we face over issues such as Brexit – or with the US administration – should be overridden by this common endeavour.

Global Britain is looking for a clear example to show its commitment to maintaining the open, rules-based world order in light of Brexit. In taking on the hybrid warfare challenge, it might have just found its calling.

Anders Fogh Rasmussen was Secretary General of Nato 2009-2014 and Prime Minister of Denmark 2001-2009. He is CEO of consultancy Rasmussen Global

“Russia’s aggressive actions cannot be forgiven, and Crimea cannot be forgotten” – that is the message from former NATO chief, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, ahead of Chancellor Merkel’s visit to President Trump and the three-year anniversary of Crimea’s illegal occupation by Russia.

The Friends of Ukraine group of former heads of state and government, and senior officials has today warned of the dangers of allowing inertia to set in towards Russia’s aggressive behavior in Ukraine. The group is calling on President Trump to give a clear and personal commitment that he will maintain economic sanctions on Russia so long as it fails to follow international rules, and that he will not allow Ukraine’s sovereignty to be traded away in exchange for cooperation with Russia in other areas.

Since Russia’s invasion three years ago, Crimea has seen its largest military build-up since the Cold War, with new bases being built, Russian troop numbers surging, the latest S-400 surface-to-air missile systems installed, and an increase in the naval presence. Russian Federation laws and citizenship have been forcibly imposed on the population of the peninsula and fundamental freedoms curtailed, especially for those who wish to express Ukrainian cultural identity or use the Ukrainian language. Meanwhile the Crimean Tatar community has been actively targeted in armed operations, police raids and other human rights abuses.

Ahead of the meeting at the White House, Former Danish Prime Minister and NATO Secretary General, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, Chairman of Rasmussen Global, said:

“With her significant experience, I am sure Chancellor Merkel will warn the President of the breakdown in international security that would follow if Russia were allowed to get away with illegally invading a sovereign neighbour. Likewise, other potentially hostile countries will also be watching to see whether they too can flout, without consequence, international rules that have kept the relative peace for 70 years.

“The leader of the free world and the de facto leader of Europe must join forces to prevent a dangerous status quo from developing in Ukraine. They should make clear that there will be no sanctions relief until Russia stops playing a disruptive role in eastern Ukraine.”

Other members of the Friends of Ukraine group: Marieluise Beck, Member of the German Bundestag:

“The Federal Chancellor will have to convey to the new American president that a democratic Germany will never again enter into any business adverse to the interests of its neighbors. This means that any “deal” aiming to return to good old terms with the Kremlin at the expense of a free and sovereign Ukraine is absolutely unacceptable.”

Carl Bildt, former Prime Minister and Foreign Minister of Sweden:

“March 18th three years ago was the day when – upon annexing Crimea after having taken it over by a covert military operation – Russia gave up all pretence of accepting the order of peace and security that had been accepted by the European and Atlantic communities for decades, the basis of which was the inviolability of state borders. Support to the territorial integrity of Ukraine is support to the peace and stability of all of Europe.”

Pat Cox, former President of the European Parliament:

“Russia’s annexation of Crimea upended our international security order. This act must never go uncontested by those who believe that rule of law is paramount in the conduct of international relations…The West needs to do all it can to help Ukraine succeed.”

Mikulas Dzurinda, former Prime Minister and Foreign Minister of Slovakia:

“Russia’s aggression and illegal annexation of Crimea has stunned the entire international community. Ukraine has had to fight a war on two fronts ever since – one with a more powerful aggressor in the east and another at home, aimed at reform and combatting corruption. Despite the difficulties, Ukraine is undergoing unprecedented reforms with support of the EU while Russia is stagnating under sanctions.”

Toomas Ilves, former President of Estonia:

“Europe may not want war, but the war in Ukraine is a reality regardless of what we want. If Europe can learn anything at all from the past, it is that concessions only cause the aggressor’s appetite for new demands to increase.”

Sir Malcolm Rifkind, former UK Foreign and Defence Secretary:

“For three years, Russia maintained its control of Crimea mainly by persecuting dissent, suppressing minorities or harassing the indigenous Tatars. It has also embarked on a large military build-up to levels unseen on the peninsula since the Cold War. To restore security in Europe, the West needs to keep the pressure on the Kremlin to return to the rules-based order.”

Alexander Vershbow, former NATO Deputy Secretary General, US Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs, and Ambassador to NATO, Russia and South Korea:

“Now, more than ever, Europe and the United States must stand by Ukraine and help it on the path of peace, prosperity and Euro-Atlantic integration. The transatlantic community should make clear to Russia that any normalization of relations can only come with an end to Russian aggression against Ukraine and a return to compliance with the international rules-based order, based on respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all independent states.”