For a former Danish Prime Minister, wandering around Paris in this month of electric March is something surreal. While the French are torn over the transition to retirement at 64, Denmark has already ratified retirement at… 70. Stunned by this hexagonal debate and the outbreak of violence, Anders Fogh Rasmussen is not yet in France to discuss social reforms: the former Secretary General of NATO, at the head of his foundation, multiplies diplomatic activities, seeking security guarantees for Ukraine, Western unity against Russia and humanitarian aid for Armenia. For The Express, he delivers his analysis of the war in Ukraine and the major international issues in progress. Interview.
L’Express: With the end of the Ukrainian winter, kyiv and Moscow are each announcing imminent offensives and counter-offensives. How do you assess the situation on the front line?
Anders Fogh Rasmussen: I think the fighting will intensify in the coming weeks. Russia had launched an offensive hoping to hit the Ukrainians before Western weapons arrived, but fortunately the Ukrainians resisted. Both sides suffered very heavy losses, but the Russians did not achieve any significant territorial gains.
The Ukrainian counter-offensive is imminent. For that, they need all possible weapons: long-range missiles, battle tanks, ammunition… Everything we can deliver. The more heavy weapons the Ukrainians have, the faster this war will end. I do not rule out a victory for Ukraine, which would consist of driving the Russians out of the whole of Ukrainian territory, even if that will take time.
In September, you traveled to kyiv to advise President Zelensky and discuss security guarantees for Ukraine’s future. Are you more optimistic today than six months ago?
Yes. First of all, we were able to admire the courage not only of the Ukrainian soldiers, but also of the Ukrainian population as a whole. This desire of the Ukrainians to fight, added to our arms deliveries, is the recipe for victory.
In September, in Kiev, I provided President Zelensky with my recommendations for Ukraine to obtain long-term security guarantees from its allies, and I have since taken these recommendations three times to the United States, in Berlin , in Brussels, etc. I am also optimistic on this point, especially when I see the British Prime Minister, Rishi Sunak, announcing that the United Kingdom is working on the establishment of a “security assurance” for Ukraine.
Since the beginning of the year, the West has increased its arms deliveries to kyiv, in particular by agreeing to supply battle tanks. Can and should we do more to help Ukraine win this war?
We can and must do more. We must start by lifting all the restrictions we impose on ourselves on arms deliveries, and then provide the Ukrainians with everything they need to defend themselves, but also to reclaim their lands. With this in mind, the decision to deliver combat tanks is essential.
But we should also deliver long-range missiles, because the Russians have adapted to the range of current Ukrainian missiles by recoiling their own missile launchers. It does not make sense. Eventually, we must also agree to deliver fighter jets or at least start training Ukrainian pilots, so that they can immediately fly our planes once we have made this decision.
So the West still has room for improvement…
We must learn the lessons of our painful debate on the delivery of battle tanks in January: we waited for the political decision to start training the Ukrainians, which delayed our delivery. We cannot win a war by a gradual approach: so far, our strategy of taking it step by step has allowed Putin to continue his war escalation. The pattern was as follows: Putin advances his pawns, then we decide to deliver heavier weapons. Then it escalates again, and we are two or three steps behind to deliver more weapons… This approach does not work to win a war, you have to surprise and overwhelm your opponent!
A wounded Ukrainian soldier is evacuated from the front line near the city of Bakhmout, Ukraine, March 23, 2023
© / afp.com/Aris Messinis
Many incidents have taken place in recent months between NATO countries and the Russian army, including an American drone hit by a Moscow fighter plane. Are you worried about escalation?
I am not worried about the risk of provoking a further escalation of the Russian camp. Putin continues his escalation on his own very well… And in reality, we have been too reluctant to react! Putin, as an autocrat, respects only one language, that of power and unity. It is for this reason that the Americans and all Allies must do their utmost to continue to help Ukraine in every way possible.
Last summer, you harshly criticized France’s support for Ukraine, which you felt was too weak. Have you noticed an improvement from Paris?
Yes, I am less critical today. Although I think that in general we should all deliver more resources to Ukraine. France has intensified its deliveries of arms, Caesar guns and all kinds of military equipment. I also noted that France might consider providing fighter planes and have already started training. I appreciate this more proactive attitude of France towards Ukraine, and it is in France’s interest that this war end as soon as possible. The greatest risk today would be that it drags on and ends up turning into a frozen conflict.
I hope that France will support the security guarantees for Ukraine that we defined in our “kyiv Security Compact” plan last summer. [NDLR : le plan de la fondation Rasmussen Global, qui officialise un soutien militaire à Kiev dans l’attente de son adhésion éventuelle à l’Otan]. This plan is important in more ways than one:
1) Even if Ukraine wins this war, we will keep an aggressive Russia as our neighbor and Europe needs a strong bulwark, a strong and stable ally in the East.
2) This would allow us to face our real long-term challenge: China and the Indo-Pacific, where France has many interests.
3) We must collectively anticipate the long term, especially for our military industries.
4) Offering security guarantees to Ukraine is an essential prerequisite for the reconstruction of the country.
5) In July the NATO summit will take place in Vilnius, and to avoid any division of the Alliance around the question of Ukraine’s future membership in NATO, we should all commit ourselves to guarantee its security . These guarantees do not replace a future Ukrainian membership in NATO, which remains on the table, but the time has not come to have this debate.
This week, Chinese President Xi Jinping paid a three-day visit to Moscow to celebrate China-Russia friendship. Should the West be worried about this alliance?
Yes. This visit shines a spotlight on China’s autocratic alliance, with Russia as a junior partner. It is potentially dangerous, even very dangerous, because if China decides to help Russia militarily, then we will face a real military threat. We are approaching a new world order, with the autocratic camp led by China on one side and the democratic camp led by the United States on the other. This confrontation will gradually change globalization, with increasingly weak economic exchanges between the two camps. This is what was presented to us in Moscow this week.
China is promoting a “peace plan” to resolve the conflict in Ukraine. Should we listen to it?
Of course, we must listen to any entity that puts a peace plan on the table. But China is neither an impartial negotiator for peace nor a mediator. On the contrary, Beijing has declared an “unlimited” partnership with Russia… And their peace plan omits an essential element for any resolution of the conflict: the departure of Russian troops from Ukrainian territory before the start of negotiations. Clearly, this is a bluff.
Recep Tayyip Erdogan opened NATO’s door to Finland after months of negotiations, but continues to block Sweden’s membership. Why is the rapid arrival of these two countries in the Alliance important?
This is a crucial step, and I am delighted that Erdogan has lifted his blockage of the Finnish candidacy. Finland must join NATO as soon as possible.
Without waiting for Sweden?
If needed, yes. It’s not our decision, but Erdogan’s. I hope Sweden can join NATO as soon as possible. However, we should not delay the Finnish arrival just because Erdogan decided to hold Sweden hostage…
You were recently in Armenia, in the throes of serious tensions with Azerbaijan. What is the situation there?
The situation is very, very serious. There is a very clear risk of a humanitarian crisis, which could turn into a humanitarian disaster in Nagorno-Karabakh. Only one road connects this enclave to Armenia, and this road has been blocked since December by Azerbaijan. It’s inhuman and it’s illegal. The region is beginning to lack essential goods and services, including medicines and medical equipment. It is absolutely necessary to lift this blockade as soon as possible, as notified by the International Court of Justice in a decision last month.
Beyond the emergency, the European Union must become more involved and Armenia hopes to strengthen its ties with our countries. The EU has deployed a small mission on the Armenia-Azerbaijan border, and I think it should expand this mission further. Europe must step up the pressure on Azerbaijan in order to have more observers on both sides of the border.
Russia, Armenia’s historic ally, has been less and less present in this area since the start of the war in Ukraine. Does the European Union have a new place to take?
Absolutely, hence the Armenian request to strengthen European involvement. Traditionally, Armenia was dependent on “security guarantees” from Russia. But the so-called Russian peacekeepers did not react when Azerbaijan launched the blockade of Nagorno-Karabakh, nor when Azerbaijan attacked Armenia to occupy its territories.
Today, Armenians are looking for friends they can count on. This is why they want to strengthen their ties with the European Union. France, which has a strong and historical connection with Armenia, is playing a leading European role in this dossier, and I hope that it will soon be joined by other major European countries. Beyond the humanitarian aspect, Europe has no interest in seeing a hotbed of instability develop in the Caucasus.