I am joined by a distinguished panel of nextgeneration experts. Please help me welcome luka, an assistant director at the Atlantic Councils center for strategy. Sissy martinez, Program Manager and Research Associate for the center of Strategic International studies in russia, europe and eurasia program. And krista, a Program Officer with the transatlantic and Defense Program and the center for european policy and analysis. Thank you for joining us. Before we begin, a few housekeeping things for you guys. This is on the record. We will leave time for audience questions. For virtual participants, please feel free to log your questions at ask ac. Org. We encourage you to interact with us on x, twitter and use the stronger with allies. I wanted to kick off the conversation with all of you guys. Nato is facing an increasingly complex and volatile Global Security landscape, now and in the future. In your view, what do you anticipate being the biggest challenge for the alliance in the next 75 years . Jason, you want to start us off . Id be happy to. Thank you to be Atlantic Council for organizing this discussion. Whats the greatest challenge facing nato . In the near term, there is no argument that russia will be the greatest challenge facing the Nato Alliance. Between its kinetic warfare and its aggressive stance toward its neighbors, russia is going to be very much the near term challenge. Looking further down the line, in the long run, china will be sort of a larger, existential challenge. Not so much for nato as an alliance but the collective left read we will talk about that in a little bit. But i would say russia. I could easily say russia and china, like what jason said. I actually think that the biggest challenge to the alliance will be ourselves. Maintaining cohesion, maintaining unity will probably be the biggest test to the alliance, given the everchanging security of the environment. Whether a new threat emerges or china in the pacific, i think keeping the unity within the alliance, remembering our core tasks and sticking to our core tasks and remembering why we are here at the end of the day, i think i will be the biggest challenge. All right. I couldnt agree more with both of my colleagues. There is a really important part in thinking of the future of nato and the challenges that we will face. Especially, i would say our generation, which is maintaining u. S. Interest and engagement in nato. That has been something that i think, inevitably, is already being questioned and is being debated. How to maintain the u. S. Engagement. Not only with nato itself but the transatlantic security. What can we as the alliance but also that european allies as well as the u. S. Itself do . That is something im not sure if we have found the answer just yet. I think nato has been going from crisis to crisis to try and find that resolve and impetus to sort of revise the alliance. It was in 2019 where there was a famous braindead speech from president macron and nato and it seems like we are a whole world apart from that. It is important to maintain the currency of the alliance, given the weight it needs to survive. I think another factor when it comes to the challenges facing the alliance is adapting to the challenges of the battlefield of tomorrow. What i want to talk about here is the multidomain operations and how we are going to need to think about the future of warfare. I think we spend a lot of time privately talking about the traditional threats that exist in the alliance and a lot of that comes from the fact that we have forgotten about investing in our military and put it as a second priority, when it comes to our weapon systems and making sure we have enough in our stock to defend our territory. We need to start actively thinking, what are the steps we can take as the alliance as the individual member states, to prevent that from happening in the future. Not only in the traditional realm but when it comes to the state realm. There are various challenges here that are facing the alliance. All of them are equally important. Russia and china, absolutely. Beyond that, there are carts the alliance will be facing that we still dont know but we need to start actively preparing for. Thank you for having me and thank you for moderating this session today. Of course, my colleagues are all right here. I would like to push back in one word, natos relevance. I think that is the biggest challenge the alliance will face. All of us here online and in person our nato nerds and fans. There are plenty of people in the United States and countries around the world that dont know what nato does. I think if nato really wants to fly for the next 75 years, we have to make sure there is future funding and countries are spending more than 2 on gdp, hopefully 3 very soon. I think, again, we are in a Privileged Club of people here that agree and know the value of the alliance. If you want an organization like nato to last another 75 years, you will have to demonstrate that you are a night it united. Im from minnesota originally. There are people who dont know what is nato, what does it do . The questions i get from friends should be concerning when we think about the future of the alliance. I want to stick with you for a second, krista. Nato is facing a fundamentally different role than it once did. When it was founded in 1949, it had different priorities. Now, we have the warfare and the security threats. We have plenty of nations around the world that are not natos biggest fans. Is the alliance falling short in its responsibilities and should there be an area the alliance should be investing in more . Yes. First and foremost, i always believe that nato needs to focus on security and defense and stick to what it is good at. While nato is learning that we need to dabble in things like Climate Change and future technologies that present problems when it comes to ai, i think that is important. I think the real challenge is making sure that nato does what it does best and that is security and defense alone. Can i also add to that . I think so far the conversation has touched on many different arenas and problems that nato is facing. They are highlighting the fact that there is so much. I think it is important to remind ourselves that there is so much nato can do. I also think it is important to see that nato cant be everywhere and nato cant do everything and i think that realistic conversation, i dont know if its being had. I would like to think it is being had. Also, understanding where our gaps are in the areas we can fill in the areas we cannot fill. Looking to other Partnerships Worldwide or if there are other countries that can contribute in different ways as opposed to others, i think that question of will versus the question of capacity, the question of will being the u. S. , that is also fundamentally important. We dont want to stretch ourselves too thin but also recognizing that we cant do everything. If i can also just add, i think one of the ways nato could invest more is invest in itself. Look to the burgeoning calls for greater e. U. Defense cooperation. This is an area where traditionally there has not been a lot of dialogue between nato and the e. U. The other day, secretary blinken was in paris and he reaffirmed that that United States was open to and encourages european allies to do more to contribute to their own defense. Some of this begins with investing and the European Defense industry, which has historically been massively underfunded. It is very fragmented along national lines. The e. U. Put out a Defense Industrial strategy, showing they are aware of this and they are working to fix it. This is the kind of thing nato can start to do at home, within the capital of brussels, to begin to have these better conversations between European Countries and nato allies. I want to, going off this, you have a strong work background with European Defense. We are seeing, especially in the wake of russias invasion of ukraine, a major defense buildup within European Defense structure. What role should nato be playing in this transformation, if any . Nato definitely continues to play an Important Role in serving as a space for all the allies in order to determine what are our joint security priorities. Most and partly, nato needs to have an active role in shaping the European Security architecture. That, to me, is the most important aspect of any european efforts, specifically when it comes to the defense industry. Not to say that that means in should only look toward nato when it comes to developing its own initiatives or rearming. But it does matter that nato has the experience of those 75 years. It provides the expertise for the allies to come together and determine what is the right way to proceed with it. Where are the gaps and the alliances and the capabilities and where can they help the alliance move beyond the traditional defense. Think about the Crisis Management and be less so of an alliance that responds to the crisis and the war and those specific threats and more so an alliance that, to some extent, has a piece shapes peace and has a role in shaping peace globally. That is why european efforts are going to be specifically needed. Secretary blinkens remarks in paris just before he went to nato in brussels were symbolic. When you think about secretary albrights speech, where she was warning about how and under what conditions the European Defense efforts should be developing, this really is a massive step forward. I think the bigger issue is we now need to find who in europe is willing to really start leading the way and to see the support for the European Defense initiative. This is something that will include and require a lot of resources. A lot of time and a lot of coordination. Europe will also need to grapple with some difficult decisions in how to manage its own security and which framework primarily to deal with this. We could take another hour and a half to go into those specifics. And then, with more recent news, we have sweden within the last month, joining nato. We had finland joining before. Are we seeing a new wave of nato expansion and how might that impact the alliances dynamic with other countries, russia in particular . Jason, maybe you want to start with this . I know you have a background in the nordic region. Id be happy to. This is an issue ive been following closely. Finland and sweden are incredible additions to the Nato Alliance. They are some of the most Capable Military and all of europe. Adding them to nato not only allows for a more secure baltic sea region, but also brings a tremendous amount of arctic know to the Nato Alliance as a whole. Talking about specific examples, sweden has an incredible fleet of submarine capabilities in the baltic sea. The baltic sea is very shallow, very sallow needed. Current salinated. Its a tremendous addition to the alliance. It is also reflective of how these countries view the security environment in europe. Ever since russia invaded ukraine, theres been a lot of talk about where is russia going next . A lot of attention is being paid to moldova in particular. This is where both finland and sweden have sweden have these debates at home whether eu security, article 40 27, whether that would be enough or whether nato, article five commitment for security would be the way to go. They opted for that. Happily jump in as a latvian american. How happy we are to have our neighbors to the north join the alliance. There have been alarm bells for years. They were right as demonstrated by the illegal invasion. The baltics couldnt be happier to have our neighbors. Many people a generation older than us thought this was impossible, sweden and finland joining. Its truly wonderful. Plug. Im sure all of us here are in support of ukraine hopefully joining the alliance as well and the door needs to be open for georgia and bosnia. We are stronger together, as a more unified alliance. One of the issues that seems to be important is how to maintain credibility of the opendoor policy . The question of ukraines membership often gets attention in media. All of us hope credibility of that promise will come to fruition soon. When it comes to other countries, either nato partner countries or have expressed interest in coming closer to the alliance, will be important for nato to demonstrate the appeal of becoming a member and the value. In particular, the u. S. Ambassador to nato recently had press remarks before the ministerial warning about the increasing russian destabilizing influence across europe, particularly in the balkans. I find it incredible the extent to which russia has managed to infiltrate every core of life in the western baltics. It has managed to slow down the completion of the regions path tornado and the eu. Bosnia in particular, thats a Strong Movement taking place over the past couple years. In particular, since the invasion of ukraine. Natos credibility when it comes to the opendoor policy is at stake but ensuring continued engagement of countries that expressed interest in nato remains strong. How much does ongoing conflict impact ukraine and surrounding nations, bosnias entrance into nato . Will that have a major influence on the ability to join the alliance . One thing we argued is beginning the nato process does not immediately trigger world war iii or that article five applies. The beginning of talks would be a tremendous signal to ukraine its future is in nato, which we on this stage agree with and it would legitimize the fact they are fighting not just for their survival but for the west. Inviting ukraine to begin those talks would mean so much. It is something, there is talk about whether the Washington Summit will see that invitation be extended and question whether that will happen but there is nothing to stop conversations from beginning with ukraine and moldova. Weve seen a surge in populism across nato members. Turkiye, hungary, slovakia, the u. S. How does this splinter the alliance . We talked about cohesion earlier. Agree, its one of the biggest threats, maintaining cohesion. Sorry, plus my thought a second lost my thought a second. When it comes to the threat of the far right in europe, there is instability this next year in euro and u. S. Elections. We need to be real right now on what that messaging will look like for the summit. The summit is a message. What will come out of it is a communique, agreement between the allies. There is still a question to remain whether ukraine gets an invitation. Keeping that level of reality will be important here. Maintaining expectations with ukrainians on what this will look like and we agree, ukraine will eventually be in nato. I dont think that will be in a few months. There is a long way to go. Its important to build that bridge toward membership. What that looks like, deeper integration into the alliance through interoperability, standards, etc. We will see how the summit goes in keeping cohesion but the framing around it will be the nato birthday party. Everyone will be patting themselves on the backs. There is a lot that needs to be done. I hope we are being realistic on what we can do. Also keeping expectations throughout the world. Two points and then a two pointer. Your previous question on the effect of the war on the nato accession process. As much as the invasion has reinvigorated discussions about european enlargement, its brought into debate nato accession. Its important. Weve done it in a specific way for a specific time, 75 years. There have been changes to some extent but it requires certain benchmarks and standards implemented. When it comes to the future of nato, that debate has been useful. There is thinking about, do we really need those things to be met to make sure europe stays secure . In terms of ukraine, the debate has been, can we take them in if part of ukraine is still under Russian Occupation . The question of west germany in the 1950s, relatively similar. This is unique. Its important reminder for nato, the accession process matters and what kind of message it sends to countries aspiring to be members. Populism so many headlines were talking about finland and sweden, why did it take so long . At the end of the day, democracy is messy but produces results. We were able to bring 31 allies for sweden and 30 allies in finland to agree on an acceptance of membership for both countries. Thats not a small feat. It takes a lot of effort in this country to get people to agree on that. Populism comes and goes and ebbs and flows. It will always be here, left or right. We should not misinterpret the debate and lead up into the accession of a member and assume it indicates a lack of ally unity. We are now in alliance, a very strong one of 32, which has been able to deliver on everything set forth. You have a background in congressional affairs. Donald trump, speaking of the far right populism side, has threatened to withdraw the u. S. From nato and has even gone so far to say putin can do whatever the hell they want against nato members. How concerned should members be about a second Trump Presidency and what steps can they take to prepare for one . Its in the realm of the possible. We like to tell our european friends to focus on the here and now and who is currently in office. I am a lawyer by training. I do believe we have to focus on the present. The u. S. Is still in the alliance. We are very much committed to our allies, to article five of the washington treaty. I hesitate when people get spun up about a future trump residency presidency. We still have the rest of the year to do great things together. We will cross that bridge when we get to it. I am not going to speculate on the poles. We are far out from november in the u. S. I like to rain people in a little about those concerns because as we know, there are other great members that hopefully will take the lead. Ive recently written on the baltics, theyve been truly wonderful demonstrating their commitment to ukraine and hopefully will continue to take that leadership position