Production and distribution of City Club forums on Ideastream Public Media are made possible by PNC and the United Black Fund of Greater Cleveland, incorporated.

Good afternoon and welcome to the City Club of Cleveland, where we are devoted to conversations of consequence that help democracy thrive.

It's Friday, May 8th, and I'm Carrie Carpenter, senior vice president and regional director of community philanthropy for Huntington Bank.

It is my honor to introduce today's forum and the president of the German Marshall Fund of the United States.

Doctor Alexandra de Hoop Scheffer with global security in question.

Geopolitics intensifying and democratic values facing increasing threats, the international order has no doubt faced mounting pressure.

At the center of these dynamics is the German Marshall Fund of the United States, a nonpartisan organization that for over five decades has worked to strengthen the transatlantic partnership and prepare it for the challenges of the 21st century.

At its core, the German Marshall Fund believes that deep cooperation between the U.S.

and Europe is key to navigating today's complex political and economic landscape.

And in times like these, it is important to hear from those with experience of steady leadership.

And the clarity to make sound decisions in tough climates, which is why we are all eager to hear from Doctor Who suffer today.

Doctor Dr.

Whoops referred became president and CEO of the German Marshall Fund in 2024.

She is the first European woman to take over the post.

With over 20 years of experience at the intersection of international relations, policy research and public engagement.

She is a leading transatlantic voice on geopolitics, European affairs, U.S.

Europe relations and corporate diplomacy.

Her expertise has shaped how governments, businesses and international institutions across the Atlantic approach defense, diplomacy and geo economics.

Before joining GMF Doctor to Hoop, Scheffer held senior advisory and research positions in the French government, academia, and international organizations.

In just a moment, we will hear more about what it takes to strengthen transatlantic security, advance economic and technological competitiveness, and adapt to an ever shifting global landscape.

Moderating the conversation is Nicolette Jaworski.

Nikki is a nonprofit and public service executive with more than two decades of experience leading communications, external affairs and institutional strategy across civic and business sectors.

She most recently served as the in the white House as Director of Press Advance, where she led press operations for domestic and international presidential travel.

I also want to recognize, like Cynthia did, the many German Marshall fellows who are here with us today.

Supported by the Cleveland Foundation.

Nearly 100 Clevelanders, including Nikki and myself, had the honor of serving as Marshall Memorial Fellows in Europe.

Before we begin, a quick reminder for our live stream and radio audience.

If you have a question during the Q&A portion of the forum, you can text it to (330)541-5794, and City Club staff will try to work it into the program now.

Members and friends of the City Club, please join me in welcoming Doctor Alexandra de Hoop Scheffer and Nikki Jaworski.

Great!

Well, welcome to Cleveland.

We're so excited you're here today.

So let's just dive right in.

There's a lot happening geopolitically.

There's a lot of public anxiety around NATO.

Article five burden sharing are all the terms that we're hearing throughout the media.

And whether the political trust that underpins the alliance is as strong as people assume.

Former Canadian Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland recently said it feels like America is treating adversaries better than allies.

At the same time, Germany's leadership is publicly trying to downplay tensions with Washington, even as the U.S.

announces plans to withdraw thousands of troops from Germany, a move many see as both symbolic and strategic.

From your vantage point, where is the transatlantic relationship today?

Thank you, Nikki Thank you all for your very warm welcome here in Cleveland.

I just spent a terrific day yesterday meeting with many of you in the room are extraordinary alumni community.

And we'll be talking about the important role that you all play in strengthening this transatlantic relationship.

I've been meeting with, local representatives, with business leaders.

And it's been an extraordinary encounter in many, many different ways.

And it does make sense for me to be here as the president of a transatlantic think tank because, Cleveland and Ohio, as a whole, has been playing a critical role in the transatlantic relationship.

You are part, if I can say, of the transatlantic stories.

So thank you for your presence here in person, online.

Or just listening to us, you know, in the queue to answer your first question, people who know me, I'm pretty blunt.

That's my Dutch side.

I have the Dutch bluntness and the French rigor.

And yet I grew up in New York, so it's a kind of weird.

We're kind of mixed, but, But but the transatlantic DNA just runs through my my veins.

And what I can tell you, you know, having worked in the transatlantic relationship for over 20 years now, if not more, I think what we're facing today is not a crisis of the Atlantic Alliance, but it's really a crisis of its operating model.

And so my first, you know, statement would be, President Trump did not create it.

He is just exposing it, in a very vivid, way.

And I really looking forward to having a conversation with all of you, in the Q&A.

And by the operating model, I mean, that's for the last eight years, basically since the creation of NATO, right?

The implicit transatlantic bargain was, if I can put it bluntly, the United States leads and Europe follows.

The United States provides the strategic leadership, the nuclear umbrella, the bulk of height and capabilities.

And, the other side, Europeans accepted US primacy, supported US priorities beyond Europe.

When asked to and Europeans chronic underinvestment in their own security and defense was tolerated.

That was, in a nutshell, the transatlantic deal or the transatlantic reflex.

What you're seeing today, is that this deal doesn't work anymore, and it actually has been hasn't been working well over the past, I would say 10 or 3 decades.

So what you're seeing in a very blunt, brutal way today was already there.

The ingredients were already there.

And if you go back to Bob gates farewell speech, at NATO.

So he was remember Obama's, secretary of defense in 2011?

He made a very, important and quite blunt speech where he was basically saying to NATO's European allies, the United States will not be able nor willing to continue to be engaged in your security, a defense to the levels of what the United States has been committed to over the past decades.

So it was all there.

It's just now really, really, out there in a much more visible way.

At the same time, the United States is recalibrating its global priorities, and you see that even more with the simultaneity of both wars in the Middle East and wars in Ukraine.

And that simultaneity constrains the United States and the United States ability to actually project military power.

And to act and to influence the outcomes of these different crisis at the same time in Europe.

Europeans are recalibrating their relationship with the United States, what they see as a much more transactional conditional relationship.

Nikki, you mentioned article five and the NATO, charter.

Article five is really the core of what an alliance is, which is basically when one country of this alliance gets attacked, then the other countries show solidarity and comes to help.

That's the contract, right?

That's the mutual the collective defense article.

And what you're seeing is how this article now is being used as a leverage, to have European allies make concessions in other fields in the trade into tariff, into tech digital field, or even in, the Middle East.

And that's what's triggering, you know, all of these conversations and hard questions that you, just raise.

Let me close with, you know, a couple of thoughts of, of where we are.

I think we are in a transition phase, and it's not nice to be in a transition because, you know, more or less where you are today, but you have no idea where you will be in the coming months or years.

And so what I'm experiencing vividly as a European leading, you know, a transatlantic organization and having worked with, you know, many American nations, Democrats, Republicans and European head of states is that we are in the limbo right now.

And that's why it doesn't sound really nice, because both sides are adjusting their posture the way they perceive each other.

But without an updated contract on who does what, on where and under which political conditions.

And I'll close by saying, this is really what, I'm trying the German Marshall Fund to do, which is recognize the reality in which we are.

And it's a hard reality, but it's also the time where we should not be finger pointing at one another, but we should actually get together as Americans, Europeans around the table and say, okay, the United States needs European allies in Iran and in the Middle East.

And we've seen that vividly.

The United States needs European military bases, European naval presence in the Strait of Hormuz.

It also needs European diplomacy and regional diplomacy.

And Europeans still need the United States in Ukraine to face the Russian threat.

So let's recognize this mutual interdependency, and let's use this as an opportunity to actually shape the new chapter of this transatlantic relationship.

And what I've been arguing for is a rebalancing, right?

Let's move away from this burden, sharing burdens and shifting not so nice words.

And let's move towards the responsibility sharing and rebalancing.

And by that I mean that the future of this transatlantic relationship, I think, will depend less on Washington, but will depend much more on what Europeans are going to be willing and able to do more.

And by doing that, Europeans will be a much more credible and sustainable partner for the United States.

What do you think people are getting wrong about the alliance when you look at the Alliance?

Well, I think there are probably two things, that I'm seeing.

The first one, is, still the idea that Europe and the United States are drifting apart.

I don't believe it's the case, because I see that every day at the political level, at the state, local level, at the cities level, at the business to business level, how this transatlantic relationship is still very strong.

And again, what we are experiencing today is a sort of renegotiation of the terms of that partnership.

And so I would say the cards are on the table.

We know what Europeans need to do and they need to scale up, not only spend more.

I would like us to move away from, you know, the 2% GDP spending in terms of defense or now the 5% GDP.

Let's move away from these numbers that really do not allow to measure European commitments, but let's focus on the capabilities that Europeans need to grow and ideally grow in partnership with U.S.

defense industries.

And being here in Cleveland.

Last week in Denver was really interesting because this is where you see that the industry to industry cooperation are just natural, and they're actually increasing every day, right.

Denver, the US is, is the first, provider, for for Airbus, for example, you have Rome, Italy, German defense companies also here.

So this is just something we need to recognize.

I think the second, misperception I continuously face is the belief that the Atlantic alliance is only as strong as the US administrations wants it to be.

I think that's the total misperception, because, again, my presence here and our alumni community who works across the tech, the defense, the business, the entrepreneur, the academic sector show that this relationship is actually being defined by such a much broader and active, network beyond the highest level of, of politics.

Right.

And so these connections, again, at the state local level are so important, especially at a time where, you know, there are political tensions at the highest level between Washington and European capitals.

This is where I believe in the criticality of investing in these other channels that do not only allow to preserve the transatlantic relationship, but actually to shape it in a much more creative and innovative way.

So that's what we're doing at GMF is, of course, we work at the highest level with the decision makers, but we also complement that increasingly with, through our alumni, fellows across all U.S.

states and across all European cities to get the most out of these talents.

These people who on a daily basis work with Europeans and Americans.

And so how do you create a sort of bottom up approach to this, creating this positive agenda at a time where the political tensions are high?

This is a great segue because, you know, I'm sitting here as a former Marshall fellow.

There are many Marshall fellows here in the room.

This role of civilian diplomacy that GMF has really made deep investments in and here in Cleveland, we've seen it through the Cleveland Foundation as well.

You know, this experience is, for me, personally shaped not only how I've operated in the world in the white House, but also here in my community.

So I'd love to kind of take a deeper dive into how GMF is building this kind of civilian diplomatic corps.

What does that mean to you?

Why do you make that investment?

And how does this investment keep the spirit of the Marshall Plan alive?

Thank you.

And thank you for being such a great ambassador.

By way of our MMI.

Community.

And I'm very, you know, thrilled to have this conversation with with you today.

Nikki.

Now, this is really and then I would say this is an investment.

We see this Marshall Memorial Fellowship as an investment and a long term investment in the future transatlantic leaders.

And so we created this program in 1982.

And the idea was that, we wanted to have Europeans and Americans continue to understand each other.

And we see today that a lot of the misperceptions we discuss are due to lack of understanding and, bizarrely and increasingly, an increasing lack of understanding between the United States and Europe.

And so we select each year a cohort of 30 Americans, a cohort of 30 Europeans that we identify as potential great talents, and potential great leaders who will have a say, in the future policies, not just at the political level, but also business, civil society, nonprofit.

I mean, it's really a very diverse, selection.

And I think that's what makes the Marshall Memorial Fellowship so special.

Because it's cross geographies, it's cross sectors.

And so each year, the 30 Americans across American states, and we have a very, very strong Ohio, presence each year we have that special connection, with, with Cleveland, Dayton and other cities here travel in 6 to 7 different European cities.

They get to meet with local representatives, with business leaders, civil society representatives, and they build these connections.

And what's extremely fascinating and rewarding to see is their these connections.

And you're an example of that.

And many of you of the room that you started to build during your fellowship actually are sustained over time.

And sometimes they even result in collaboration or co-creation of nations that truly have an impact within the communities in which you are anchored, or more broadly, within the transatlantic relationship.

We do the same with Europeans.

They travel around 6 or 7 different American states, and they create the same connections.

And what's the magic of that is that the feedback we get is that not only they build these bridges with Europeans and Americans, but they actually build connections within their American group and within their European group.

And so to give you an example, the French president, Emmanuel Macron, is an alumni of TMF, and he happened to have done his fellowship with Viktor Orban, the former, Hungarian leader.

And so this creates some interesting, connections.

Yes, I know there are some movements in the room.

Logically, we'll get there.

We'll get there to get there.

But it's an interesting example of how, you know, accidentally or, randomly, you get to travel also with interesting people who might not share your same perspective, values, cultural backgrounds, but you actually also build these pan-European connections.

And if I can use that word, this Pan-American connection.

So it's a dual impact.

And final thing, I mean, what I continue to discover when I, you know, travel across the United States is how impactful this network is because, you, you are also translators in many different ways, and you're an example of that, a Nikki, you translate some of the most complex issues in geopolitics, in the media.

You know, you can name it to the broader, public, right?

It's civilian or civic diplomacy.

And that's exactly what we're doing with the MFF is investing in the civic diplomacy and empowering these young talents that then end up to be wonderful leaders or ambassadors of gmfrs across sectors and geographies to really convey these messages of how it is important for Europe and the United States to continue to sustain that, special relationship and especially today.

So it's, it's a real, it's an incredible journey.

And it's amazing to see just visiting Cleveland, how deeply connected you are.

It within this community, today we have 4000 alumni.

We have a cohort of, I think 80 here in Ohio, which is, quite a lot, and, and we'll continue to, you know, to cultivate that, that network.

I will say that, you know, I had my fellowship and then months later, I was thrust into a completely different role, and I found myself actually visiting some of the same embassies that I had visited as a fellow.

But now I'm there on behalf of the United States government.

And in my role, I was there to advocate for press access.

And it was really interesting to me that, you know, the the way in which we operate our press corps in particular is very different from how a lot of our allies operate.

Yes.

You know, our our press corps is unique.

Sometimes it's often aggressive.

And, and in many cases, press access, could be really difficult in, in some of our, allied nations.

And so I just kind of want to get a sense of, you know, how do these differences in the approach of media, how do they shape trust, not just between governments, but also between citizens and institutions across the alliance?

I think that's a crucial, question.

And it is also linked to, you know, the the criticality of offering our younger generation the opportunity to access today the most objective, data driven and data based information.

I think that's important.

And as a professor, and I was, as a mother as well, I really invest a lot of time and energy, conveying, and and teaching, the younger generation how to take this, distance from the information and the overflow of information we're receiving every day and how to develop a critical mindset.

Okay.

So how to distinguish basically the noise from the signal.

How do you distinguish what's not important of from what is absolutely essential.

And I think the media and the press too.

What you what you said has a critical role in helping people, make that distinction.

So that's number one in terms of the transatlantic relationship, what I've seen and what you've certainly, experience also having worked in the media, is that unfortunately, over the past years, also because of, you know, budget cuts, many of the foreign correspondents or foreign bureaus of the big American media that used to be, you know, spread across European countries have either closed, paused or shrank.

And that trend at a time where I was saying, we need to increase these channels to better understand each other and communicate between Americans and Europeans has really not helped.

So I think there is a need to preserve these, anchors of U.S.

media across Europe to continue to have American journalists have the most hands on, objective, data driven analysis on what's going on across Europe and then be able to convey this.

So that's, number two.

Then number three.

I think what's really important is the sort of educational role of the media as well, at a time where there is a lot of questions about NATO, about being part of an alliance, who does what?

And I think it is very important also, again, for the next generation who has not been, you know, through their their parents or grandparents history, you know, of, post-Second World War, the idea that European peace is actually a luxury, but it's not taken for granted that the media also plays a role in raising awareness on the value of NATO, not just for Europe, but also for the United States.

And the value of just knowing, what this alliance is about.

What does it mean?

What are we doing together and what could we be doing more together?

So what I'm sometimes missing in the press is, this leap that I would like to see more, to move beyond just the daily analysis or commentary of what is being tweeted and said, etc.. And there's a lot of that.

Unfortunately, we're being very shortsighted, but I think there is a need even to partner with think tanks like GMF and others to have this more forward looking vision.

Okay, what what comes next?

And how could really smart journalist experts think tankers get together, and shape some of the scenarios or alternatives to what we are experiencing today as transatlantic partners?

So as a think tank in particular, GMF published a piece, just before the Hungarian election, that suggested a victory by the Tisa party could not just signal a political change at home, but a real shift in Hungary's relationship with Brussels, Kiev and the strong and the broader transatlantic alliance.

The argument in your GMF piece was that even a change in tone, moving away from constant confrontation with the EU, EU and Ukraine could have major implications for Europe now that Orban has lost after 16 years in power, we're seeing that question play out in real time.

Peter, make ours.

Landslide victory ended Orban's rule and gives him the power to reverse many of our Orban's contested reforms.

So looking ahead, how significant is this moment for Europe?

I think you're the way you framed us is exactly right, which is I would really encourage, people looking at elections, maybe to focus less on polls.

They're not always right.

And to focus.

And that's where the critical mindset comes again, to focus on watching, the structural variables that elections will either lock or reverse.

And that is true in terms of the Hungary and other elections.

What will these elections lock or reverse in terms of the EU or European strategic direction?

And yes, the fact that, the election of Magyar in Hungary is ending, you know, 16 years, 16 years of Orban's power, who was in essence, the EU's veto engine machine, if I could term it like that is significant.

And so immediately, what it has had like consequence and impact is actually having the EU being able to continue to sustain Ukraine assistance financing because it was being blocked by Orban's veto.

So that is a significant evolution.

However, Magyar will have much more homework to do at home.

Right?

Because the legacy of 16 years of Orban will have to be absorbed, and will have to go through a testing phase, right, of rebuilding institutions, media, etc.. So that's for one thing.

The other thing I wanted to highlight is a sort of reverse trend that we've seen over the past couple of hours, or a couple of 2 or 3 days in Romania, where you had the kind of, reverse, trend, a pro European, coalition government, being fractured, by a no confidence vote because one of the main parties, the Social Democrats, switched sides and teamed up with the far right, to topple, this government.

And so what you're increasingly seeing across Europe are these tactical deals where mainstream parties partner or tactically cut deals with the far right in order to be able to move their own agendas?

And that's that's a risk.

That's a risk.

So I would say especially and I know there's a very strong central Eastern European Community here in that state in Ohio, but also in Cleveland in particular.

And I met with a lot of them, yesterday and this morning.

I think it's really important to watch and look cautiously at what's going on with democracy in central Eastern Europe and to realize how fragile democracy is at the end of the day.

And so it's not a, you know, this is good news for Hungary and therefore for the entire region.

It's a much more mixed, political landscape and, and our role as GMF, because we have a footprint.

We are in Warsaw, we are in Bucharest, we are in Belgrade.

So we have a very strong central, eastern, western Balkan presence.

We have the capacity as well, to have, you know, the Intel, to understand the political, the social toll, the economic dynamics sometimes way before others who do not have that footprint and to provide this analysis, but also to build connections with some of our alumni who are, players and actors of democracy across the region.

So this is also part of, you know, our Do tank, experience, not just think tank and really working with these important actors, in, in the region.

I have one more question before we'll then open it up for the audience.

But you talked about our our deep connections to Eastern and Central Europe here in Cleveland.

You know, notably, we have one of the strongest Ukrainian communities anywhere in the world.

And the war has certainly been discussed on this very stage many, many times.

But now there's an interesting dynamic.

Right now there's different geopolitical, conflicts happening that have an implication, not only in the Middle East, but now with Ukraine.

So the strategic partnership between Russia and Iran, the changing energy dynamics and the broader realignment of global power, they all seem increasingly interconnected.

How should we be thinking about the war in Ukraine, not just as a regional conflict, but something actively shaping instability and diplomacy far beyond Eastern Europe?

And I think, you know, geopolitics is global, but it's also very local.

And you've mentioned, you know, the combination, the intersection of the war in Ukraine, the wars in the Middle East.

And here, you know, in Ohio, in any American states, you just need to look at your gas bills.

You need to look at your supply chains.

If you're working in the manufacturing and, you know, industrial, sector, you look at the Ukrainian, family, with kids at school, you look at defense contracts, right?

At the plant, down the road.

And you realize how these conflicts are not just global or far away.

They're actually very close.

Very close, of course, to Europe first and foremost.

But it's impacting actually the United States as well.

And that that sort of intersection, that connectivity sometimes missing and how politicians think of these intersections.

And Ohio in particular, because Ohio is de facto a global state, and a state that is deeply intertwined with Europe for historical reasons.

But also today, you know, Ohio is a hub for aerospace industry, for tech, for many of these issues.

And what I see is increasingly Europeans, looking at what I was saying at the beginning, at the state to state or to cities, to cities diplomacy at a time of heightened, you know, political tensions at the highest level.

And so at a time where Europeans are significantly reinvesting in their defense, I see a lot of opportunities for Ohio as a hub for aerospace and defense industry to actually build up these partnerships with the European industries as well.

So it has, you know, some impact.

But I think it's also interesting to look at the opportunities that, come out of broader geopolitical, crisis.

And I see that more, and more, the last thing, you know, I would say and this conversation in the City Club of Cleveland is an example of that, but also the Council of World Affairs with whom I met yesterday and GMF, I think we are all organizations that, again, try to not only explain these big geopolitical, issues, but to, translate them in terms of what it means for the broader communities, what it means for business interests, what it means for inter lawmaker, conversation and to really move this transatlantic conversation into the right direction.

And I was struck by my conversation yesterday with a couple of GMF alumni.

And one of them, told me yesterday, this is an opportunity where we can actually get together and change the trajectory of things.

This is a time where we can, reset, the table together.

And so there is a need.

And you are an example of this to also rethink how we engage.

And who do we put around the table.

And I think what's really important is we need to diversify the interlocutors and to include much more the private sector, but also the media perspective, the younger generation, the entrepreneur perspective, because it's by collecting all of these talents and smart people that we will collectively shape some more creative, innovative solutions to the problems that we are facing today and will be facing tomorrow as Europeans and as Americans.

And I just wanted to you know, I've been, having that coin in my pockets, over the past day, but that's, one of our Marshall Memorial Fellowships who gave me that coin yesterday, which represents, the Ohio, GMF alumni, community.

And they came up with a brand that I really like, and, and it's written as the, you know, the, the logo, it's, strengthening trans-Atlantic trust.

And I think that's exactly, you know, what we need to do today at a time where trust is lacking, between both sides of the Atlantic, I think our role, as, a broad community of doers and thinkers, is to to rebuild that trust.

And so I'm here, you know, in, in Cleveland, I'll be traveling in other, American states in the coming months, to not only have these conversations, but to actually really think of how do we foster deepen these partnerships and how can GMF really help you in what you're trying to achieve in your different, sector?

So that's the message.

You know, I just wanted to to share with you.

And I very much look forward to our conversation.

And thank you, Nikki.

Thank you.

All right.

Well, we are about to begin the time honored tradition of audience Q&A here at the City Club.

And for those just tuning into our live stream, I'm Nikki Jaworski.

I served as the I served as the director of Press Advance for the white House.

And I'm the moderator for today's conversation.

Joining me on stage is Doctor Alexandra de Hoop Scheffer, president of the German Marshall Fund, and we are discussing what it will take to strengthen transatlantic security and adapt to an ever shifting global landscape.

We welcome questions from everyone city club members, guests, students and those joining our live stream at cityclub.org.

If you'd like to text a question, please text it to (330)541-5794.

That's (330)541-5794.

May we have the first question?

we have become a disordered world.

Europe and Ukraine being attacked by Russia, Israel attacking 13 different countries, Iran attacking 7 or 8 different countries.

Sudan has become a problem and it has become a disorder from what it used to be.

How do we put the genie back together from the European perspective?

My answer to your question, would be to say Europeans and Americans, need to recognize and they are recognizing this live both in Ukraine and in the Middle East, that the transatlantic relationship is not sufficient anymore to find solutions, for these crises.

so I think this is a time where Europeans and Americans need to, if I can say, open their lenses and recognize the need to actually broaden their partnership with other countries that have an increasing say in shaping the outcome of this crisis.

You look at Iran and the Middle East.

There again, you have China, Pakistan, who have been proposing, you know, their own peace plan.

But I think it's important for us as Americans and Europeans to sometime, as you say, think out of the, you know, the sort of, prefabricated formulas or diplomatic reflexes and be much more creative and open to partnering or plugging in other powers.

it's really interesting to be based in this country, because this country is also increasingly playing a mediating role in many of these conflicts, be it on the European continent or in the Middle East.

So that would be my suggestion is to open our lenses, be more creative and accept also the new geopolitical reality of crisis diplomacy and and conflict resolution.

How do you now leverage your alumni from these leadership programs across the United States, across Europe, to take things out of the, DC area to find solutions for these really tough problems of diplomacy and, moving forward.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

And, thank you also for being part of the host committee.

Thanks to you, I've been spending a wonderful time here, in Cleveland.

And thank you for reminding, you know, gmfrs a history, but also the history of the initial conversations and public debates on the Marshall Plan, because I discovered that on my way to Cleveland, that the first large citizen debate on the Marshall Plan and the question at that time was, should the United States engage or should it not engage in Europe's reconstruction post-World War Two?

And it actually took place here in Cleveland, and it was not an elitist, conversation.

It was a broad citizen conversation.

And I really like, you know, that that spirit, because I think we need to have more of these broad conversations and benefits from all perspectives.

And so to answer your, your question, you know, we have, a treasure, truly, which is our alumni community.

We have alumni across all American states, and they all work in very different fields.

They have different perspectives, different political, cultural backgrounds.

But that what's make this network so special.

And so what I want to do is really benefit from your perspectives, into our policy work.

And to plug your expertise, your experiences, into framing some of the solutions.

And that's my second, proposal.

I want us to be much more solution action oriented.

We're not just going to analyze what's going.

And by the way, the media does that.

We surely can do this, but we need to do the extra leap, which is to have you help us shape based on your hands on experience on the ground, the solutions, be it on us, European tech, cooperation.

And I think there's a lot more we could be doing together.

It's the defense industry.

And of course, it's all of the energy issues.

And what I got from my conversations in Cleveland yesterday was that actually, in this free sectors defense, digital and energy, this is where and that's the third I would say, for position, I would like to make the state local or to cities to cities, connections need to be elevated.

So I really believe in the combination of top down but also bottom up, solutions and be able to do here.

That's a concrete, you know, proposition.

I wanted to make, to do a very interesting convening here in this city where you would bring the diversity of these experiences together, maybe taking or benefiting from, you know, the travel of one of our European, alumni cohort.

Right.

Coming here have maybe, young students, from Cleveland's, universities.

I know many of them are involved and, you know, United Nations simulations or things like that.

And then mix the business perspective as well.

And really, at the end of the day, have a goal, which is to have maybe 5 or 6 key items, action items that we all agree upon and that we could then be selling, to decision makers and say, well, you know, in Cleveland, we spent two days or three days, talking together, strategizing together.

These are the people that were in the room from the younger generation to, you know, to top, local representative business leaders, Europeans, Americans.

And this is what we collectively believe should be the five guiding principles for a transatlantic tech digital energy or defense agenda.

And I think that's what we need to do.

And you, the alumni, because of where you are, because of your mindset and your experience, this is where we can really plug you into our work.

And this extra leap I'm talking about.

So that would be my if I could say my ideal, approach.

And again, my team and I are very open to any other, you know, suggestions.

I was listening carefully to what you said about these other emerging powers, and there's been different names for them over the years.

They didn't.

Premier Carney or Prime Minister Carney called the middle powers at the Munich Security Conference earlier this year, and that got a lot of attention, a lot of publicity.

So I wondered if you had some we've talked a little bit about or a lot about the economic, perhaps impact of a middle powers type of strategy, bringing more people to the table.

But I wondered what you thought about the nuclear nonproliferation aspect of that, because part of what he said, too, is that goes against this idea of the P5 being the only people superpowers who can have nuclear weapons.

And now there's talk of perhaps Germany having it so they could have a greater nuclear umbrella for the rest of, Europe, perhaps even Eastern Europe.

Talk of South Korea having a nuclear weapon, perhaps Japan.

And of course, that feeds into Iran's idea about me, too.

Well, I should have one, too.

We're the most ancient civilization if everybody else gets one.

And why don't we?

So I wondered what you thought about the nuclear nonproliferation aspects of this emerging kind of middle powers scenario that might replace the liberal world order that we've known since World War two?

when you see, you know, like, that's what you're seeing nuclear proliferation or countries looking at, you know, nuclear as a solution to protect their own security interests, that actually translates a heightened sense of insecurity.

And you've talked about, you know, the German, the French and the broader European conversation on, how to use maybe the French, you know, nuclear, deterrent as a broader European deterrent.

I think that's actually a healthy conversation.

To have, and, and, and to have that conversation actually be not only accepted, but actually being now cone shaped, in Germany, it's a very interesting trend, but it's also in reaction to how Europeans are perceiving us, reliability and predictability as an ally.

So it's all packaged into the broader, understanding perception of the role of the United States as a nuclear deterrent itself.

So that's number one.

Number two, on the middle powers.

I mean, that's probably not the best way of calling down, because a lot of these powers, have already emerged.

But there is, you know, a sense as well that a lot of, countries who have been relying, on the United States as well, feel that they might not be able to continue to rely, as they have done on the United States in the years to come.

And so what do they do?

They get together, they strategize, and they think of, you know, a potential nuclear solution as well.

So that to me, this conversation needs to be anchored in the broader conversation of how these countries perceive their regional and global security interests being, threatened and how they are also perceiving the role, and the predictability of the United States in that particular field.

And you're right to point out to, you know, South Korea, you know, Japan and other countries, the conversations that are happening today, you would not have imagined, taking place even 2 or 3 years ago.

And so that's an indicator of the broader insecurity and stability question that was raised in the first, question.

And of course, this needs to be, handled, extremely, extremely cautiously.

And that's where you need you actually need a strong U.S leadership and European leadership, to frame, these conversations, because then you're going to end up, you know, having a, a mastered, nuclear proliferation that is going to be just so problematic to, to, to manage, at the end of the day.

So, absolutely, that's a big, big topic.

And I can tell you today, the conversations Europeans are having is unprecedented, unprecedented, especially in the German conversation.

And I will end up with this because we are the German Marshall Fund.

And Kerry mentioned our, you know, our history, on many of the issues we discussed or we raised today.

If many of the responses to these questions actually lie in Berlin, it's in Germany.

Because if Germany doesn't move or chooses to move in one direction or the other, Europe will not move or Europe will actually move and that's why also you're seeing a lot of, German focus right now.

And it has always been the case from U.S.

administrations because Germany is still this pillar, in Europe.

France is, of course, an important player.

Everyone knows what France is thinks, you know, in terms of strategic autonomy, and having to ramp up and build up European capabilities and operational, capacity to act without or with less America.

That has always been a tradition in the French strategic mindset.

But what I think is striking today to see is that this French, narrative on the need for Europeans to do more with less America is actually spreading across all European capitals.

And, you know, I remember seeing, you know, ten years ago, you know, Paris is the capital of strategic autonomy.

Berlin is the capital of strategic patience, right?

We wait.

Things are not good, but they'll probably get back to normal.

That's just wait.

You go to Warsaw, where we also have an office.

This used to be the capital of strategic embrace, right?

Central Eastern Europeans embracing the U.S, embracing NATO.

And of course, a nuclear umbrella provided by the United States.

I would not be able to say this the same way today.

The the the, the the idea that Europeans need to do more, produce more as Europeans is now completely a European accepted narrative.

And within that conversation, you have the nuclear conversation that has just scaled up, as well.

So that's the new reality, is that good?

Is that bad?

I would say it's healthy.

It's necessary.

Not just because, the US administration is asking Europeans to do more, but because it's for the sake of Europeans.

And I think Europe would be in a different situation today, if it had been reflecting on these issues, not because Washington is asking them to do this, but because it is for the sake of Europe's future.

And just by doing that switch, would have already helped, Europeans to think more collectively about their defense, industry, about their energy transition and about their digital transition.

And now, you know, finish with this triangle digital energy and defense transition.

These are the three things, that Europeans need to be working on.

Because when you take these three things, they're either dependent on the United States or and China, right.

Today Europe's energy transition depends on for the 20 China's solar panels.

Europe's the fence right now depends on the US defense industry.

And then you take the digital, transition.

It depends both on Chinese and U.S tech.

And so the strategic autonomy debate that we're hearing a lot and a lot and even more is really not about, decoupling, from the United States.

That's often the myths, one of these misconceptions, it's really about how do Europeans assess, the long term risks of their hyper dependencies vis a vis the U.S and or China and Russia, by the way, still, in terms of energy, how they reduce these dependencies so that they can actually be more sovereign in these domains and therefore be a better partner for the United States.

So that's how we're trying also as GMF, to change the terms of the debate and the conversation so we can get at the heart of all of these hard choices and decisions ahead of us and hopefully do this, in a transatlantic, way.

Right.

It has to be co defined by Europeans with Americans ideally.

So that's what we're vividly trying to work on.

Let's give a really warm round of applause to factory visit.

Scheffer.

Thank you.

Thank you for sharing your expertise today.

Thank you for reinforcing Cleveland's role in the in the transatlantic relationship.

Forums like this are made possible thanks to the generous support from individuals like you.

You can learn more how to become a guardian of free speech at the cityclub.org.

I'm Nikki Jaworski, and this forum is now adjourned.

Production and distribution of City Club forums on Ideastream Public Media are made possible by PNC and the United Black Fund of Greater Cleveland, incorporated.