Partnering for Peace: NATO’s Role in the Rules-Based Multilateral Order
summary
Argues that NATO must pair harder power with political software: clearer strategic communications, more large-scale exercises (Trident Juncture, JEF, EI2) and upgraded interoperability; points to concrete threats — illegal annexation of Crimea and occupations in the Black Sea, hybrid warfare, cyber and disinformation — and calls for region-specific posture and leadership. Cites a national policy choice: 40% defense spending increase (Sweden) and a political goal: Georgia aims to join NATO within 10 years, arguing partnership plus enlargement stabilizes the rules-based order.
AI-written summary · about
chapters (14)
- 0:00Introduction
- 1:36Biggest challenges to todays rulesbased order
- 5:34What are your views
- 10:32How should we respond
- 12:01How can NATO become a more global alliance
- 14:36How can NATO play a more effective political role
- 17:58The rising global ambitions of China
- 20:06The rising influence of China
- 21:05Georgias cooperation with China
- 22:18Audience Question
- 22:59How should NATOs approach to partnership evolve
- 25:06NATOs partners
- 26:16Increased defense spending
- 28:47Expectations from Georgia
related talks
29mPublic Diplomacy
19mTowards a Resilient Europe: Innovations in Defence and Security
01h 00mNew Challenges in Cyber Security
43mOn the Theatre of Cyber Operations — Defending NATO's Eastern Flank
18mCyber-Comrades: Alliance Building in Cyberspace
01h 05mDigital Sovereignty in Wartime: Legal and Cybersecurity Considerations
52mThe Role of Partnerships in Advancing Cyber Diplomacy
42mThe Quest For Cyber Peace