Welcome to this edition of Active Measures.
You won’t have read about this yet in the media, but arm-twisting and lobbying are already under way to find the next NATO secretary-general.
The obvious choice would be someone from “eastern” Europe, because the job has always been held by someone from the “old West”. In fairness, the new SG should be a woman: all previous incumbents have been male. And she should come from a country that spends 2% on defence. She should also be an impressive public figure with a great record in office, excellent people skills and strong backing from her home country.
That leaves only one candidate: Estonia’s prime minister Kaja Kallas. But Estonia’s a country of only 1m people — some may feel that the new SG needs to come from somewhere bigger.
I’m hearing people talk about Donald Tusk. He was the world’s top Pole during his stint as head of the European Council. He’s from the most important country on the eastern flank. I doubted that the current Polish government would support him (the state-run media routinely decries him as a treacherous closet German). But if he’s NATO SG, then he can’t lead the Polish opposition in the next election — which would it might otherwise win.
Another possibility is Kristalina Georgieva, the head of the IMF. She’s Bulgarian and female. And she’s an able administrator, having held big jobs at the World Bank and European Commission. But she’s got no experience in military and security affairs, and Bulgaria is a defence flyweight. There’s also Christine Lagarde, who is quite busy running the European Central Bank right now, but might like to spend some time saving Europe’s security instead of its currency. France is a defence heavyweight and would like to have the SG job. But Lagarde has no defence experience.
I have a soft spot for Slovakia’s President Zuzana Čaputová. But her country’s government is in meltdown. She may feel she needs to stay home to guard democracy against a resurgence of the deeply-dodgy, pro-Kremlin leftwing populist Robert Fico, who wants to return to the prime minister’s office.
There’s also a government meltdown in this country. As an opposition politician, I relish the disarray. As a citizen, I deplore it.
A few thoughts. The ambitious proposal to raise defence spending to 3% of GDP is unlikely to survive. Britain’s problem is not that we spend too little on defence, but that we spend it inefficiently. Aircraft carriers are one example. Also: incompetent procurement of things we do need, such as armoured vehicles. And barnacled military structures. We can’t do everything, so let’s do some things well, such as defending our allies in Europe.
But that’s boring. I hear troubling “innovative” ideas floating around Westminster and Whitehall. One is that Russia’s war in Ukraine shows that we wildly overestimated the Kremlin’s military clout. It will take years for Russia to rebuild the capabilities destroyed in the past eight months. The danger of a Russia attack on Estonia, or any NATO country, has receded. We should save money and concentrate on more pressing threats in the Indo-Pacific region.
That’s worrying for Estonia, which is the focus of British efforts in Europe now. Britain briefly boosted its presence there but is now bringing the extra 700 troops home. The British contingent there now is boosted by Danish and French forces.
What I’ve been doing
My most recent Times column bewailed our lack of deterrence in responding to Russia and Chinese sub-threshold attacks. For CEPA I looked at the impact of Ukraine’s strike on the Kerch bridge.
And of course doorknocking.
Anyone reading this who will be in London on October 31st is welcome to come to this event — but hurry if you want a ticket as they selling fast.
https://www.edwardlucas.com/trick_or_treat_putins_war_in_ukraine
Best regards, Edward