those are the best them, which is built in 2014. but for now, the emphasis isn't getting people's dynamos back to safety. and that's the latest on the w news. this, our married evans didn't all be back at the top of the hour with more headlines for you, for me in the entire news team in berlin. thanks for watching the do you big ultima video companies play a role in the destruction of the rain forest? the letter for luxury casa, often comes from illegal capital funds in the amazon, yet the supply chains don't mess it to the view industry. the illegal as a starts may said on dw, the nato,

the north atlantic treaty organization was formed to 75 years ago. it's aim to prevent war between solver and countries, the 75 years of europe and history without a war. that's the ultimate expression of a successful alliance. then, on february 24th 2022. russia launched a full scale invasion of ukraine. war had returned to europe. ukraine itself is not a needle member, but russia's actions have prompted the question. is the western military alliance capable of defending itself? how strong is nato among european members, especially there are some glaring weaknesses. peas, yours in security is basically 90 percent dependent on the us news feeds from

that's $27.00 is that conte handled medium sized missions on their own. and this documentary we'll hear from people who know nato, from the inside the we cannot guarantee that we could protect munich frankfurt. berlin can do it, found that in the aftermath of the 2nd world war, nato achieved the unimaginable over time. former enemies became partners. think this is fascinating. there were also german officers who are part of nato's command structure, who had been fighting against the americans and the british in the 2nd world war. 75 years after its founding nato's importance is now greater than it has been since the cold war. around the world, there's an increasing focus on military mike, the me, it's not just pressure, but also china, and them,

at least i think saudi arabia has tripled us ground forces since 2010. so put the guy fossil and what about nato? we took a holiday from reality and now we're dealing with the consequences of the the this is moans in belgium is a city of about 100000 residents, 70 kilometers from the capital brussels. the it's home to one of the most well protected buildings in the world. nato's military

headquarters, the supreme headquarters allied powers, europe, more shape for short. it's a central hub for vital security information around the clock. everything from movements in the or the defense alliance as borders to suspicious activity worldwide, the abilene, rob bower, chairs, the nato military committee, he acts as a link between the political world and the military. the alliance is doing now for 75 years and we went from 12 to not almost 32 members. so that in itself, i would say, is the proof that this alliance adds value otherwise. so many nations would not have joined when it was founded after world war 2, nato consisted of 12 countries. its goal during the cold war was to contain

communism and prevent the soviet union and the eastern block from expanding their influence. overtime, 20 more countries have joints, nato, including former eastern bloc states. today, the alliance stretches from the arctic ocean in the north, to turkeys border with syria in the southeast, and from the baltic states on russia's border across the atlantic to the us and canada. it is the world's largest defense alliance, providing security for 1000000000 people. and yet nato itself has no troops of its own. the way it is constructed is that the nato is basically 3 things. it is command and control. it is standardized ation. the end of this exercises and the troops come from the nations,

the southern states, all $31.00 seem to be $32.00. and so once nations give their troops to nato, for an exercise, for an operation or for collective defense. once that has been done, then the supreme allied commander, your general canolli, is in command of those forces and he can use them within the mission that he's been given. the traumatic effects of military conflict were a key factor in establishing nato. the, i think that it's essential to recognize that nato is created and founded in the aftermath of the 2nd world war. and so the war and its destruction loom over all of

the people involved in these decisions. so many of these men, and they're almost all man in this story early and nato's history had fought in either the 1st or 2nd world war or played a role. and so part of nato's founding is about making sure that war doesn't happen again. so many of the people believe that what they're doing in creating nato is presenting a return to war in europe. when the alliance was found, it had no military structure, no command center. first and foremost, nato was a promise. the, i think it's important recognize that when the treaty was signed in 1949, it was a symbolic treaty. it was a political symbol that these 12 states were going to protect each other and worked

side by side. on april, 4th, 1949 heads of government, foreign ministers and senior diplomats from 12 countries gathered to sign the north atlantic treaty in washington, dc. the agreement had just 14 articles, but if there is anything 2nd today, if there is anything in the future, it is a will of the people of the round of freedom and far p a just a few months later in august 1949, the soviet union designated its 1st atomic bomb with that the us no longer had a monopoly on nuclear weapons. and the arms race gathered speed. the soviet union became the west number one enemy. with nuclear weapons in use,

any provocation could have meant the end of the world as we knew it the . and yet at the time, the greatest fear of nato's founders wasn't a direct attack by the soviet union. it was one canadian historian timothy andrew sail called the weakness of democracy. the particular worry in the late 19 forties. this was that the experience of the 2nd world war had been so devastating and so traumatic for the people of europe that they would not be willing to fight for their state or for their national interest in the future. the worry was that if the soviet union were to mobilize its forces or stage exercises or somehow flax its military muscle,

then perhaps the citizens in european countries would ask their leaders to give in to whatever the soviet demands or the millions of deaths during the 2nd world war were front of mine, and according to the historians, theory democracies leave themselves open to blackmail because they trying to keep the peace at all costs. they tend to offer compromises and give in to pressure by being a part of nato and being a part of the alliance. the leaders felt that they could go to their people and say we're part of something bigger. and in the aftermath of the war, when leaders did not think that their people would ever be willing to fight again, it was very important to show this group strength today, 75 years after nato was found that for is once again being funded in europe. the world's biggest military alliance has had to ask itself if worse came to worst,

how well would it be able to defend itself? the whole nation is have to make sure they can defend themselves as article 3. and we have basically neglected that for many years. so somebody, for example, bridge and has greatly reduced its land forces. germany does have land forces, but them not necessarily compatible with other um, forces. phones has nuclear weapons, but far too few of them compared to russia is new to us, no sense vocab. after the cold war, the emphasis on collective defense faded more and more needles focus, shifted to operations in afghanistan and libya, and the so called war on terror to them i'm. that's also. and so we had overseas missions that required small and mobile units of armed forces, klein will be used. these are sent abroad for very,

very specific tasks that brought the shape for in the crisis response operations. time is on our side. we decide, are we going to augusta and when and with how many forces and for how long? but in collect a defense, an x for every might at tech you and then you are ready for you are not. the alliances weaknesses are now becoming a parent. nato has grown to include the $32.00 countries. that's $32.00 sovereign states, which means a whole lot of bureaucracy. the being able to deploy troops quickly can be decisive in war. but in europe, that's a big job. despite the you and the shang and free movements, only from 2014 to 2017 lieutenant general. ben hodges was the commanding general of us troops in europe. the so you know you

can take a truck, load of apples from poland to portugal, never be stopped. he could drive all the way through. i can't do that with military . and i had troops that were up in the baltic countries in poland, small numbers. and um, and i noticed that my ab ation, that helicopter unit was their maintenance readiness level was going down. and i asked my commitment, aviation brigade commander from onbox said, why are they not repaired, what's taking so long? and you said so we, we cannot get the maintenance parts from onbox to live order. it takes weeks. i said why? i was not here. i just assumed driving from onbox to lou verda, that would be like um, being on the interstate $95.00 in the us from florida to virginia. you mean your it's all nato countries, all e u countries. what's the problem?

and that's when we realized that there was a problem moving military equipment across borders through the different nations you had to have permission. nato is aware of the problem. since 2021, it's been operating what it calls joint support and enabling demand for jason based and the southern german city of the j 6 main role is to come through with the bureaucratic red tape when it comes to troop deployments. its commander is lieutenant general alexander, as all funk the, i'm the food, our district. we have a federal structure and was hoping to split into that means you have to get states with different governments working together. as enough. i'm with audit. there are forms that need filling out which are very thorough and still very from nation to nation tool. so that's something we're working on. see is if they've done missing,

see, then you have to consider things like customs regulations, for example, for animal disease. prevention is the to useful who appropriate box it, but to move tanks across germany, you have to put them on a train quickly or put them on the back of the one of these large trucks. we don't have enough of these trucks to carry tanks. so you need to buy a but in piece time, don't you mind is not just calling us that they should just stop doing an intake tank. so having to work through these process, this is very tedious. it's not sexy me. this is the all the thoughts barracks and bavaria, southeastern germany. tomorrow the soldiers are travelling to lithuania on behalf of nato. the still see in western germany, the yellow sun that has the weights. this bridge will hold,

and i mean, everywhere in west germany, you have the sun. you don't have that as you go further to the east, the each unit being sent to nato's eastern flank and lithuania takes its own equipment, the that way. procedures and movements can be practiced and internalized the just kind of mind thoughts like i know my vehicle has what i mean. i know what falls that has or doesn't have to have this done to our maintenance partner hill. what can do things like send a spare parts like the way that's tied enough to send it to the when the banks and the previous receipts and where you belong to other companies. so it's very, yeah, you know, it's like having a car. have you tried your root and you don't just swap it with someone else's and the alternate them to talk to them? you have all the aim of j sac is to create a kind of common military zone, akin to europe's border free shang in area. in the future,

nato wants to be able to deploy 100000 soldiers in 10 days. right now it takes 15 days to deploy less than half that number. and it's not just about the soldiers themselves. to be on the, i don't know. we've just seen this with the war and ukraine. a land will eats up incredible amounts of resources. ukraine supposes are really struggling just to produce enough ammunition. they've scoured all the existing stock calls and used everything. i go to post on the beach foster plot that skips as good as the wind according to calculations. an average of $50000.00 artillery rounds are currently being fired per day in the rest of the ukraine war. it's the 1st test. most of those munitions have to be produced on, so you mostly have to be on hand. to go to minutes, you'll see a german ammunition needs to also fit in dutch barrels. and with some of them,

it has to be distributed to depos somewhere in europe, in a logical way, pulling ottam by zip. i hopefully will never needed the sea, but it's part of the have incredible deterrence of it. as you have tied up loud for these not trickle j sec is also responsible for ensuring sufficient ammunition supplies in case of a direct attack. lieutenant general is those fund and his international team use simulations to practice for that. eventually, how much equipment is available to troops in a given place? where are their shortfalls? how much fuel is needed? which roads and bridges can they use? and where might the team have to improvise? where are the most strategic locations for weapons depos? here at j sec headquarters, every conceivable conflict scenario is played out. most importantly, everything that's planned here has to be achievable at any time. up should i call them books, and what that will deterrence only works if our plans and preparations are credible,

precise. in other words, it has to work in the event that we have to defend ourselves, newton county. that's in order to do what we all want to do, namely prevent war saying, i have to, for example, be able to manage this re deployment of large bodies of troops and piece time, of course. and so before the 1st shot is ever fired, i can make it clear to the opponents that they are going to fail. okay, awesome. so i think at 1st everything goes to plan for the soldiers from bavaria on their way to lift the lenient the loading process is completed, but then there's an unexpected delay due to a rail strike, the train is only able to travel a few kilometers 3 days later, it's still in bavaria,

nato headquarters and brussels, where crucial political decisions are made in the event of an attack on a needle member states. this is where leaders would decide whether to invoke article 5 in the nato process. article 5, of course, is the article in the washington treaty that is most well known armed attack them on she'll be considered an armed attack on, everybody knows about article 5, but that's not a, a laser beam. like if you go to the store in, in the door automatically opens up, there is no automatic trigger for article 5. if these are constituted, big consultation in which all nature member states would have to agree to officially consider article 5 acceptance and put it into effect to a view. that's a thing cost. it's such decisions must be made unanimously by all members. and

countries such as germany and the united states military operations also have to be approved by parliament or congress. you remember last year there was a missile that landed inside poland and killed 2 poems. and if this was an automatic thing that you, somebody could've said nestle hits bus russian missile hits inside poland. article 5, of course the, the, the people involved in the process involved are mature enough to say, wait a minute, we need, let's, let's check and see what happens in the beginning. that idea that article 5 would compels other allies to fight to defend one ally was the hope of the british and the french and the canadians. that the, that's what they wanted article 5 to say. but the united states would not have that because it took way the power of congress to declare war. the problem is that the more countries there are more individual interests come into play. if just one

member state refuses to consent, article 5 folders. we have 3200000 soldiers that need to know what to do. so it's not enough to say no and need a war in a crisis. if you're a tech, you can say no, but we're still a tech. so we need a solution. so if somebody says no, then we expect from bets, nation that says no point during that. if yes, the nato allows for what's called constructive extension. this means that the alliance can be invoked even if not, everyone agrees. but a no vote would be a problem. in the case of an attack, if we have one nation, says this is we do not support. this is article 5. then the other nations can still act in a multi lateral way, but it won't be under a nato construct. so this,

this will be a problem. and yet the foundational ideas behind nato, our community and solidarity. the in the 19 fifties and into the sixty's. there was a real effort to try and connect the people of the nato countries with each other. and so things like educational exchanges and study tours and professional associations were considered to be very important and building up that solidarity within the alliance. and so a lot of american officials to spend a lot of time thinking about how to build those relationships, not just between the leaders, but between people in that era. such exchanges often began with presenting the typical customs of a given country. the milk buzzer aches and cheese cheese made by special formulas and skills passed down some generations of peasant cheese makers producing delicacies like coal event coming back famous

throughout the world, the archive of material legs. it shows nato's early years, educational films, from a pre globalized era made by the organizations own press office. the focus wasn't on weapons or military maneuvers. instead, individual member states were introduced through their traditions and culture. these films weren't intended for the public. they were shown to soldiers before they were stationed in a different country, part of pre deployment training to help answer questions like, what are they like over there? what can we expect the and i think this is fascinating. there are also german officers who are part of nato's command structure, who had been fighting against the americans and the british in the 2nd world war.

so these men had 5 beside each other in some cases, had fought against each other and then worked to build this alliance together. during the cold war, the nato base is already existed in federal, germany, and that one of them and international jet pilot school men from the united kingdom, from western germany and the united states. and the arm of france and those of italy work can train together in 1955, just 10 years after the end of the 2nd world war, west germany was admitted to nato. but despite the emphasis on community, the fear of being abandoned by one's own allies is as old as nato itself. the, this idea that, and maybe some of the allies would just sit back in the war,

was constantly on the mind of leaders throughout the cold war with the united states. really defend western europe. if in response to the soviet union would fire nuclear missiles at the united states. and so it's from the late 19 fifties on that. this balancing act becomes extremely difficult. the very same year that the federal republic of germany joined nato. vin chancellor corner hot. uh no, i asked experts for a legal opinion. he wanted to know how binding article 5 really was. in other words, what was washington's obligation if germany were to be attacked? the lawyers, assessments both the question of whether an attack has occurred and the question of the nature and the extent of the assistance to be provided or at the discretion of the united states. which suggests that any country is free to decide whether or not to stand by an ally remedy. i take the 1st cons, article 5 makes you think, oh,

not certify attack of nato member state. then all the other $31.00 are going to come and smack me down. i'm of the month. but if i really read it in detail, what it says is each member promises to send a check on another, and they don't remember state as an attack on themselves. and that's the, that's the sales. and sometimes some websites are they might just say yes, i see it as an attack on me, but i still won't do anything. honors then chancellor calling about an hour did not want to rely on article 5. he opted for a different kind of guarantee. stationing of us soldiers on west german soil for i'm not what they were the real safe guard. one of the reasons it was so important to have american, british and canadian forces in europe was that they served as something of a trip wire for article 5 or 4 the other allies to come to the aid

of europeans or germany. especially if it is a federal republic was attacked, is a very important political signal, because no american political leader is going to allow some american troops to get caught up in a war or a small conflict without util, talary of us power coming to join that fight this is woke law and lithuanian soldiers from several nations have been stationed here since 2017. they're a part of nato's multinational battle groups after russia annex crimea, from ukraine in 2014. these small mobile units were set up under permanent nato command. their station to long nato's eastern border. estonia, lafayette lithuania and poland. the strength of each battle group is $1000.00 to 2000 soldiers and further battle groups have been added since rushes full scale

invasion of ukraine in 2022. in slovakia. hungry, romania and bull guerria. germany is responsible for a battle group in lithuania, near the swell key gap, a 100 kilometers stretch of the lithuanian, polish border between bella roost and the russian escalade of colon and grad. nato believes it's what a russian attack would be. most likely. colonel klaus paid to a bag r. as in command of the german contingent station here in lithuania, protested objectively speaking full size from russia and better, ruth, all no longer present in the kind of strength we saw before, the wall in ukraine, the cliff to many forces have been withdrawn. and the point in ukraine are coming up if you so objectively we can say that when not currently under any acute trent mod done the splintering,

the german soldiers from the barracks in bavaria have now arrived by plane. but their tanks are still in transit and the evening there is a flag ceremony symbolizing the change over of troops. while some are heading home after 6 months, the others are left with an important task, demonstrating loud and clear that nato won't abandon lithuania in the event of armed conflict. so it's lisa wayne. yeah, is it that it's not only so this way here, but it is our soldiers that are working there. and therefore, it is maybe not seen by people as dutch soil and dutch or germans foil. but it is our soldiers that work there and are going to be attacked. it's the same principle that called nevada annella relied on security isn't guaranteed by the

famous article 5, but by the international make up of a military presence. using these types of the german armed forces here already function. and so it's, but at the same time that showing that lets you ain't in people look and say we're here standing alongside you shoulder to shoulder for dogs because we can't forget that it wasn't totally the americans who guaranteed on security during the cold war . and it was several allied countries you could say, when now repaying the favor, we're helping to pass on luckily experienced in the past in terms of security and protection for a given video to make sure that our comrades here in lithuania and in the other baltic states also voted in protecting nato's eastern flank of buying shorts under another struggle. different sorts of developers.

nato's defense policy is seldom popular before russia's war in ukraine approval of nato and the united kingdom was 59 percent in germany. it was 54 percent and in france just the 39 percent. even more dramatic were pulling results regarding article 5 and the obligation to defend allies prior to the war in ukraine, only 32 percent of french respondents were in favor of providing military support to nato member romania if it were to be attacked by russia and just 14 percent of german said they would want to stand by nato member turkey in the event of a as an attack. but the truth is support for nato has always fluctuates even during the cold war. in west germany for example, the 1980. so a big piece movement that lead other nato countries to wonder,

just how reliable the germans were as allies, the leaders who built nato. and then the leaders who maintain nato are frequently talking behind closed doors about germany and their worries about what germany will do in the world. and this takes one of to pass. so one argument earlier in the cold war is this fear that germany is going to try and establish itself as an independent, strong power in europe. and that this will be a return to the 1st half of the 20th century. and that motivates a lot of years in the 19 fifties and 19 sixties. and then there's a switch from the 19 sixty's on. there is a fear and a worry that perhaps the germans no longer wish to be powerful at all. this is a period when there are major demonstrations in germany against nuclear weapons,

against nato, against the united states forces in germany. and that sentiment still persists in parts of the population. today the, it is slow, but this as easy as i think a whole lot of people in germany have very happily being in an intellectual, political and economic comfort zone from the motto has been what's have a rush here is doing in syria or georgia or ukraine. isn't nice, but it has nothing to do with us over this happened with allstate, support a lack of solidarity and no common vision. in 2019 the year of the alliance is 70 of the anniversary french president and mine . when my home went so far as to say, nato was experiencing brain deaf project runs as the problem with nato has always been that they want more from it, not less. that's how my cause,

comment must be understood. perhaps has consistently been one of the allies saying we almost do more than what we're doing this here to. my home criticized what he saw as a complete lack of common strategy within nato. this is in dice. thank god for a long time, germany had a kind of fighting hard attitude towards anything involving conflict. i think that's why i'm exxon gave a wakeup call. it's not just about money or soldiers. it's about asking, can you even imagine the worst case scenario? because if not, you'll be truly helpless. if it happens, it's not going subsequent. 2 days later than planned, the tanks arrive and let the way neo. but before they finally reached the barracks, there's one more hurdle to clear. a few kilometers shy of their destination, the tanks have to be re loaded onto another train. the tracks and some eastern european countries have different gauges and aren't compatible with those in

western europe. what's items in the defense situation? the trains would have been here on tight stripe wouldn't have happened, and the german real operator would have gotten them here on the schedule. it's not until the next morning that the tanks finally had to where they will be stationed for the next 6 months. they drive the last few kilometers along country roads. so there will be german kindergartens, schools and supermarkets built in the region. that's because a new german brigade will be permanently stationed in lithuania, operational by 2027, about 5000 soldiers and their families will live here. the move is part of nato's defense strategy to prevent russia from attacking other former soviet countries

after ukraine. that's especially a concern in the baltic states. unlike in ukraine. here it would constitute a direct attack on nato territory. the me, there are also conflicts between russia and nato on the cyber level. and investigation published in 2023 revealed the bulk and files leak and the existence of hacking centers working for the russian government. the revelation showed how moscow was trying to destabilize the west via the internet. nato's response to this new threat can be found in the estonian capital talent close to the russian border . this is the cooperative cyber defense of the center of excellence. so nato in general, has acknowledged

a significant incentive board in tulsa cyber cyber attacks and declared in 2021 that in certain cases so well that the effects of cyber sabot effects the cyber attacks against the nato nations can trick are natal or to could 5, that means collect the defense and response might not be lead me to spawn cyberspace only. the alliances top cyber professionals meet here regularly to practice for emergency situations. the annual lock shield simulation involves defending a fictitious country from a cyber attack. so it can be called like say, with championship or i think big. so cyber defenders every year and that's the purpose of it. the so east you have to smoke the national environment where to most complex and then vote on the light did

a environment the ac used like in real case when a nation is under a cyber dec, another annual simulation crossed swords took place in december 2023, it involved responding to a threat to with a counter attack. those taking part had to disable a power plant tax surveillance cameras and obstruct the rail network. the points were awarded for each hack server, and the winner was determined at the end. ukrainian experts also took part in the simulation. meanwhile, just over a 1000 kilometers to the south, russian hackers actually shut down ukraine's biggest telecoms operator for several days. after the soviet union does on eastern european countries left the eastern bloc and gradually joined to nato. in 1999 poland. to the czech republic and

hungary became members. 5 years later, estonia, latvia, lithuania, bulgaria, romania, slovakia, and slovenia followed. albania and croatia joined in 292017 k montenegro, and in 2020 north macedonia, became the last country to join nato before the war. and ukraine. why is it that so many nations at work that are former soviet republics, such as estonia, that being left? when you are former members of the worst, i'll pack like poland. why did they seek to join nato as soon as they possibly could? why does ukraine want to do it now? is because they know what is like to be under that russian control. some people say that by expanding nato toward russia, that we were committing a form of aggression that we were threatening russia. i can tell you because i was

there in the george h. w bush administration. when the warsaw pact collapsed and then when the soviet union union disintegrated, central and eastern european countries were pounding on nato's door, asking admission. they had been dominated by the soviet union since the end of world war 2. they wanted to be free, and they wanted to be with what they saw as like minded countries in the west. we didn't do any recruiting to add to nato membership. all of the countries that joined, opened the process themselves, the

saving the fast for last our final stage in south africa. extremely on and off road icon rate to get these babies like on the side to side to the finale of our road trip in

30 minutes on d. w. the project cassandra re determined through our investigation that has pull out was operating like a global drug court. not somebody normally seizures organizations, the objective to financially drain and bring them down. the team agents from the american drug enforcement agency. i mean, as well as another whole left. they wanted to go after their money. they had from lies themselves. we needed them to reveal that so world answer their own people. why did the us government suddenly shut down project cassandra in 2016? 03 pod documentary series. i'm asking has paula stats may 4th on d,

w. the . this is dw news live from berlin. thousands protests against the israel's handling of the war in gossip 6 months on mass rallies in tell of even to other cities, call for an immediate hostage deal with her ma, a new election also on the shelves, mexico, because ties with excellent doors. police store miss embassy, we're a former ecuador in leader bush sheltering the

.