Interview with the Czech president Petr Pavel: «Our uncertainties hurt Kiev’s counteroffensive»

PRAGUE Walking through the very long corridors of the marvelous castle that dominates Prague, one can understand why V�clav Havel— the playwright, poet and dissidence leader who was the first president of Czechoslovakia liberated from communist rule — used to travel it �on board� of his scooter. Today in the place of the man who was the face of the Velvet revolution sits a former NATO commander who last January brought a sigh of relief to Brussels by defeating the populist former premier Andrej Babiš, and bringing back to the palace a pro-European and pro Atlantic stance that had been missing for a long time, given the pro-Russian and pro-Chinese positions of his predecessor Miloš Zeman.

Petr Pavel is 62 years old, with well-groomed white hair and beard, and an actor’s face. We met him a few days ago on the eve of his trip to Italy, where between today and tomorrow he will see Sergio Mattarella and Giorgia Meloni, and then move on to Milan with a large delegation of business leaders. As we talk - about Western uncertainties over Ukraine, European defense and Euroskepticism - we are watched by two teenagers chosen by Unicef to spend a day with their head of state.

The European Union was relieved when you were elected last year because of your pro Western stance. But in the last few weeks we have seen mixed results in Eastern Europe from Slovakia and Poland. What’s your take on the strength of populism right now?

�The issue of populism dominates the political discussions in a number of countries. So it’s not an exclusive problem of any part of Europe or any part of the world. There are always efforts to give people promises that cannot be met, to frighten them, to give them a common enemy. In Czechia right now, it, it’s not such a major issue, we are now in a much bigger agreement between the president and the government on major policy issues. But it’s not defeated, and of course with the upcoming elections, both to the European Parliament and our parliamentary elections, in 2025, we will see populism on the rise again. So, what we have to do to face populism is not coming up with a different set of promises but rather giving people the real picture of the situation: being frank in our assessments and giving them proposals that are based on facts, analysis, truth. I think Europe has a great capacity to defend itself against a number of different challenges and I believe that we will find a solution to energy and security issues under the condition that we call our problems with their proper names. It means staying away from exaggerated political correctness and be able to listen to each other, to overcome this big divide between liberal and conservative, between progressives and conservative�.

Just a few days ago, it was the anniversary of the Velvet Revolution, where Czech people fought not only for freedom, but also to go back to Europe. Next year is also 20 years since Czech Republic joined Eu, but in the last few years, Euroskepticism has grown here.

�On the one hand, there is no doubt in that we are now much better off than we were before we joined the Eu. On the other not everyone is convinced that the EU is going in the right direction. The level of integration is an issue that divides a number of people. There are some who would go straight towards the United States of Europe and full integration, and there are many that argue we should keep Europe as a community of sovereign nations, with the governments able to keep their sovereign voice over the majority of issues. As usually, the truth is somewhere in between, but finding the proper balance that would fit the expectations of the European population is extremely difficult. I believe that we shouldn’t push too much, but rather listen to the different voices from different nations. With regards to the future of the Eu I think most of the European population understand that in the current global competition we can only prevail if we stay united, none of the individual European countries – including Germany, France, Italy – will have alone the power to stay competitive. Take China, for example, that is a tremendous power in terms of political weight, economy, research and development in science: if we keep dividing our resources into so many different streams, we will obviously be losing that competition. That one thing we should always remind ourselves when we talk too much about our autonomy and sovereignty�.

And what about defense? We have the war in Ukraine going on, but also now the Middle East, and maybe after next year presidential elections in the Us, we could end up once again with a Us president that wants to retreat from the world. So do you think Europe should be more active to build a strong common defence, not only within Nato?

�That’s the old dilemma about European defense. I witnessed a number of these debates about European autonomy in person when I was chairing the NATO military committee. Some politicians at that time were even mentioning a European army without specifying what European army was meaning. I believe Europe should not only be more resilient, but also more capable. More capable means having an effective defense industry, but also more structural cooperation, built on multipolar cooperative arrangements with those countries that are not yet members of the EU or Nato. And we can also, of course, strengthen the European pillar of NATO as a foundation of the European defense identity. But it doesn’t make too much sense to duplicate this capability that was built over more than seven decades, and trying to come up with something new. Europe should stay focused on crisis management and cooperative security while strengthening the core mission of nato, collective defense, by providing critical enablers. By enablers, I mean those capabilities that we are missing today in Europe, that is, strategic lift, especially air lift, strategic communication, strategic intelligence. Because without these capabilities Europe will not be able to run any bigger operation without American presence. And in the future, we may find ourselves in a situation where the United States will be busier elsewhere, and Europe will need some kind of military action. If we don’t want to stay dependent entirely on the United States, we should develop our own capabilities. And if we manage to institutionalize somehow the European pillar by coming up with an arrangement similar to, for example, Berlin plus, that will strengthen our capabilities for defense. We don’t have necessarily to come up with something news, but the Eu needs to be stronger inside Nato�.

With your military experience, what’s your assessment of the situation in Ukraine right now? Even Ukrainian top generals have talked about a stalemate. ..

�Well of course there is a slight difference between the point of view I had in the past as a NATO general, and, now as a president, when I have to see the situation not only from the point of view of the battlefield, but rather from the principles ‘one. I believe that we have no other choice than giving Ukraine all they need to be successful in their mission to restore their sovereignty and control on their borders: whatever less will be our failure. And a Russian victory would turn against us in the future because it would strengthen their perception that they can achieve their goals by military power and encourage all similar regimes around the globe that western democracies are weak�.

But do you think we were sometimes slow during these almost two years in providing furnitures, with the F 16 for example, and while we were talking and debating and hesitating Moscow was gaining ground?

�Quite frankly, I believe that not everyone believed that Ukraine could sustain the pressure. And once Ukrainians showed extreme determination and courage and that they were able to defend themselves, the willingness of some nations to provide better equipments grew over time. I’m grateful to my own citizens and government that were able to support Ukraine from the very first day: i believe mainly because of our own experience with Russia we know that the only language that they understand is the language of force. If there is no fear, there is no respect. We also want, obviously, to come to a stage where it’ll be possible to discuss with Russia and negotiate, but it has to be within international rules and and laws, not on terms imposed by Russia. Ukraine’s sovereignty was, by the way, guaranteed by Russia itself. Not only by the Budapest memorandum, but also by bilateral treaties between Russia and Ukraine from 1990 and 1997, when Russia specifically recognized sovereignty and territorial integrity of its neighbour�.

But you also said at the NATO summit in July that whatever is achieved by the end of this year will be the baseline for future negotiations. And now it doesn’t seem like a very good point for Ukraine to start negotiating from.

�What I meant is that Ukraine this year will have only one chance for a big counteroffensive. It is so costly, demanding and time consuming that it’ll not be possible to have two, three, big counteroffensives in one year. The other thing behind my reasoning was that next year we’ll see elections coming up in Russia, United States, potentially even in Ukraine. And another reason is that this winter will be extremely difficult because a big part of the Ukrainian infrastructure was destroyed, especially electrical and heating, and even with our help Ukraine was not able to repair all of it. So it’ll be extremely difficult for the population of Ukraine and we also have to take into account their morale. With lacking support from the countries that are now supporting Ukraine, the sense of frustration will grow. And of course this creates a situation that is not very favorable for continuing counteroffensive operations. Winter will give time to Russia to reconstitute, and they were already able to turn their industry into war mode. So they are producing now much more large caliber ammunition, more tanks, they are recruiting more soldiers. They are in negotiation with a number of countries in terms of deliveries: North Korea has a potential 1 million artillery rounds. If we miss the opportunity to sustain our support to Ukraine, then next year may be even more favorable to Moscow. This year is quite crucial for developing success because, next year will be more complicated�.

And, we somehow failed?

�Unfortunately, our deliveries of military equipment are not strong enough to allow Ukraine to continue a high intensity of operation. We failed on keeping our promises on delivering Ukrainians with artillery ammunition, training for the F 16 is not running as fast as it should. After the deliveries of Storm shadows from Britain and a similar missile from France, Ukraine was expecting to receive German Taurus missiles. But there is a delay there and an ongoing discussion in Berlin if they are going to provide those missiles or not. This creates imbalance in deliveries and the uncertainty, on Ukrainian side, is not a good foundation for military planning�.

Putin is probably having the best few weeks since the start of the war, with the world distracted by Gaza. And even with sanctions Russian GDP is growing…

�Yeah, right. There were some good news for president Putin, but I still still believe that we have the capacity to change things�.

Back to Russia, another part of their aggression to our values is information warfare, and election interference. I’ve seen these huge pro russian rallies in Prague. Do, do you think Moscow is behind them?

� I think those protest were somehow driven by fear among the population about socioeconomic conditions. Of course they were also fed by some populist leaders and elements in our society that are linking those fears to the pro Western orientation of this government, and reminding us that we were liberated by the Soviet army in the past. But at the same time, I think there are not so many people here that would be inclined to get back into Russia’s hands. The experience with Soviet occupation in 1968 is still pretty much alive�.

You asked for more surveillance on Russian people in Europe.

�Well, when Russia declares the European countries its enemies, then of course we have to be cautious when it comes to Russians within our societies, as many of them are working for Russian intelligence. Czech Republic has more than 15,000 companies owned by Russian citizens. And there’s a number of properties owned by Russian citizens here in Czech Republic and many of these properties are used in contradiction with the rules: they are being used commercially while they should be only used for diplomatic purposes. So there are some frictions. Considering what Russia is doing right now in Ukraine it would be very irresponsible if we leave a room open for Russian intelligence and propaganda to use all their channels freely�.

Contrary to your predecessor, you are quite hawkish also toward China.

� China is not an enemy at this point to us but is definitely our competitor. Their institutions, their values, are different from ours, and they’re also very much different in their long-term strategic goals and interests. That’s why we have to work together not only to provide sufficient counterbalance to China so that they take us as a partner but also to show them that we can’t be pushed their way. Right now China has expressed their will to adapt global institutions to reflect more on the changing global environment, which is fair. There needs to be some adaption to the world order constructed after the second World War. But those adaptations should be made around the table, not on the battlefields. And you can only negotiate when you are respected. China is not just an economic power, but also a military power. It’s quite often omitted, when we assess China, the building of Chinese military capabilities that stays a little bit beneath the radar. But they are developing their capabilities at a tremendous pace, both on land, in space, air, and maritime domain. That’s why we also should call on China, and rightfully so, if they want to be a global superpower, to take global super responsibilities for all the problems around the world, and to use their weight, - economic, political, diplomatic – to pressure on those who are breaking the rules, like Russia. And we should call on China to exert their influence over North Korea, not to deliver military equipment to the aggressor, but also, to play a positive role in solving problem in Middle East and so on�.

The world is witnessing another serious crisis in the Middle East, that is also dividing deeply European societies.

� Saying that no problem should be solved primarily by military means starting with the condemnation of what Hamas did the seventh of October in Israel. Those atrocities cannot be justified by anything, even if we can feel some sympathy to Palestinians’s desire to have their own state, and the Czech Republic has supported a two state solution for a long time. The fact that they were frustrated by a lack of progress cannot justify the killing civilians, the murdering of babies, the kidnapping of people. So we obviously understand that Israel has to defend itself against such a violence. But now it’s also time to look on how this problem can be solved. Israel claims that they have to fully defeat Hamas, at least the military part of it. The truth is that ideology cannot be defeated. We were able to defeat Isis militarily on the ground in Syria and Iraq. But, as an ideology, ISIS, survives: they moved now more to Africa. It’s very difficult to believe that the ideology presented by Hamas can be defeated by military means. Israel wants to destroy Hamas’s military infrastructure but the problem is that this infrastructure is mixed with civilians and civilian infrastructure in Gaza. The pictures of destroyed civilian buildings that create a lot of emotions around the globe. Even if Hamas is deliberately using these facilities as a shield, as a protection. It was the same with the Taliban in Afghanistan and the Islamic State in Iraq or Syria. For sure we have to be careful of what is a proportionate response and push for a peaceful solution, but also we have to root out the evil. And the evil is Hamas who behaves as a terrorist organization, and is not protecting their own population, but rather using people in Gaza as hostages. Until this is resolved we have to support Israel. At the same time, we should support measures to protect Palestinian civilian population, to deliver humanitarian assistance, and to, once the military part of a conflict is resolved, do our best for restoration of a decent life in, in Gaza�.

What do you expect from this trip to Italy? Meloni’s government is close to some of the more euroskeptic leaders of Visegrad, like Orb�n.

�It’s one of my first international visits, if I don’t count our neighbors, and I think it will be a beneficial trip for both sides. Our bilateral relations are excellent and there is a lot we can build on. We have a great cooperation in aerospace, the energy sector and transportation so there will be a lot of things to discuss as we’re also taking with us a strong business delegation. I met prime minister Meloni in Prague and I found her focused on pragmatic solutions. In fact, our views were very similar on a number of issues. So I think the discussions with her and her government as well as with President Mattarella will be leading to good progress�.

Corriere della Sera � anche su Whatsapp. E' sufficiente cliccare qui per iscriversi al canale ed essere sempre aggiornati.