I was born on the wrong side of the Berlin Wall. When a visit Ronald Reagan's Rhein-Sentern Santa Barbara California in 2016, had a big piece of the wall Reagan helped tear down on display. I joked that I didn't recognize it because I had only seen the other side. Back in 1987, I was speaking at an event in West Germany and I told people that I was sure that the collapse of the Berlin Wall was inevitable and would happen very soon. They looked at me like, okay, that's crazy, but he's young, 24 and he's just a chess player. What does he know? And they stopped listening. This was before Ronald Reagan's famous tear down the wall, speech in Berlin, which was around the months later. The other famous forwards from the US president also concerned Berlin. Present Harry Truman said, we stay in Berlin to promise that US forces would protect and supply West Berlin during Stalin's siege of the city in 1948, the famous Berlin airlift. Not to put myself in the company of US presidents, but I was inspired by Reagan and Truman in my own Berlin speech at the Aspen Institute on October 14, 2015. I titled it, four words to change history. I said, we must remember that societies do not have values. People have values. If we want our values to succeed, we must protect the people who hold them wherever they are, whoever they are. And if I may finish with my own four words here today, fight for our values. From the Atlantic, this is Otokrasid America. I'm Gary Kasparov. My guest is Matthew Dofner, joining me from Berlin. He's a journalist who is now the CEO of the multinational media and technology company Axel Springer. He leads dozens of publications in many countries, including political and business insiders in the United States and built and developed in Germany, among many others. He is German. And he is a German perspective I was after from him. Many around Europe and the world are waiting for Germany to lead. So will it? Hello, Matthias. Thank you very much for joining our program. Hello, Gary. Quick question. Are you at your office now? Absolutely, at my office in Berlin. So I want to let the listeners know that this office that was built by the founder of your company Axel Springer, if I'm correct in 1966, it's literally next to the former Berlin Wall that physically divided the free and unfreeworld back during the Cold War. So it was standing on edge of democracy and otocracy, not anymore now, but not to put to find a point on it. It is precisely what this show is about. So from this perch, tell me, what do you see as a principle of threats to democracy in Europe? And what is European or Europe's place in this ever-changing world today? Yeah, thank you, Gary. So sitting here in our kind of historic headquarters building, it's a golden skyscraper right at the edge of the former Wall and Death stripe, just to illustrate that when we literally cross the street in order to get to the new part of our headquarters, we cross a row of cobblestones and these cobblestones are marking exactly the spot where the wall used to be. So this building literally was built as a lighthouse of freedom as the founder called it. It turned out to be the new center of a unified Berlin and a reunified Germany with a lot of euphoria around the idea that freedom prevails, the open society model prevails. And at the moment, it looks quite different and it looks different from a factual base if you check the results of freedom house analysis and other comparable analysis of the state of freedom. Then you see a freedom recession globally for many years. There's never been such a significant downgrading of formerly free countries to partly free and partly partly free countries to unfree. And also most of the centrist democracies are in relatively weak shape whereas autocratic authoritarian systems pretty systematically achieve their goals and gain ground. So it's quite a challenging time for the open society model and on top of that we have internal issues. I think we should not only look at the external threats and the autocrats and dictators, we should also look at ourselves and what we need to do differently in order to succeed. Agreed. So let's look deep inside. Let's start with Germany. So 35 years ago there was a reunification. Many believed in it would be beyond our wild dreams and it would never happen. It did happen. Has reunification happened in minds as well as geographically and politically? Well Gary, I'm not a diplomat so I speak very openly. Also if it's about my own country I remember very well when the war came down. Prominent publisher here in Berlin, Volphiopsytler said it's going to take at least a generation until we will see real integration of mindset and until we see real reunification psychologically and mentally. I thought this is totally et cetera. It's going to be a question of two, three, five years. It's now more than a quarter of a century and still there is quite a significant divide. There is still an East and West Germany and you see that on many levels also politically. At the same time we also have to realistically see that all together with regard to management and the economy, the reunification was a success and went well and there is a lot of prosperity and if you go to the East German cities and compare them how they looked like 30 years ago, incomparable and there is so much progress and wealth and positive development that we should also not be too negative about it, we should be also a bit thankful. On the third level and that I think is the most important one, Germany has developed for many various reasons, a degree of complacency that I find more and more dangerous and I think we have to really take that as a warning call to do things differently and here of course there is a lot of hope with regard to the new government that is in place and that could with strong leadership solve the problems most importantly the problem of an economic turnaround and with regard to migration we also need a very significant shift conceptually and with regard to execution I think those are the two most important topics but that requires really bold decisions and leadership. After unification Germany has become the largest country in Europe and it is a driving engine of European Union but considering the historical, called liabilities or historical baggage so is Germany ready now after so many years, 80 years since the end of the World War II, is Germany ready to overcome this sense of historical guilt and to become a positive force to take a lead? That is a very interesting question Gary because truly I think this face of German history during the Third Reich, the Holocaust and everything that led to this unparalleled horrors have deeply traumatized the country and in a way discredited the term leadership and the idea of leadership and even the idea of excellence to a certain degree. Unfortunate misunderstanding of this chapter of German history is that not only you should never be involved in any form of military conflict, pacifism as a naive idea, the second horrible misunderstanding is that leadership and excellence is almost something negative. It associates with Germany needs to lead the world and needs to dominate the world and irony is that almost everybody in Europe and in the entire world is waiting for German leadership and things Germany need to lead. It needs to lead Europe together with other countries and that leads me to the second element of your question. Are we able to overcome the traumas? Not hopefully not in the sense that we forget about it. I think what happened should never be forgotten that we should learn from that but we should learn the right lessons and the right lessons are always do everything to defend the free and open society model and if we lead with good intentions and in the spirit of partnership together with others then I think that is the most credible and the most successful mindset. I think apart from a right value set and system of coordinates the most important thing that the new German Chancellor needs to prove and needs to have is courage to move fast to act and not only speak and to really tackle the two biggest priorities economy and migration. I think of one of the Winston Churchill's famous phrases that no success is final, no fear is fatal. What counts is the courage to continue. Because he has challenges both domestically and internationally. So you mentioned economy and migration. Now do you consider energy independence as a part of economy? Very big issue here the elephant in the room is nuclear energy. Will this government go back to nuclear power plants? That is the big question that everybody is asking at the moment in Germany because energy policy that is based on windmills or only solar is not going to solve the problems and is not going to provide the energy that you need also with regard to excellence in artificial intelligence. But let us remind our audience that the Germany made a decision to walk away from nuclear energy what back in 2011 is. I can share an anecdote with you. I remember was invited to the Russian Embassy by the Russian Ambassador with a group of editors of my of Aksan Springer for lunch. And it was a coincidence that the lunch took place on that very day. And each person had a glass of vodka at the table and before we started the ambassador was raising the vodka glasses and said let me cheer to the German Chancellor the decision to drop out of a nuclear energy will be very good for Russian energy and for the Russian economy. And people looked a little bit irritated and basically sorted the joke but then they realized it was the greatest gift to put it. Right. Exactly. Because that made Russia the sole supplier or this major supplier of energy to Germany and via Germany to many other European countries. I personally think it was one of the most irresponsible decisions of German governments in post war history because not only did it create the biggest damage to the German economy and the German energy sector but more importantly it has basically strengthened and financed the Putin that we have to deal with since then and the Putin who then invaded Crimea and to then invaded Ukraine and the money is the main resources that has funded that war. It's quite a sad case and it shows again why trade policy, economic policy is so directly intertwined with geopolitics and security politics and that's why this whole decision to drop out of nuclear energy is way way bigger than just a topic in the context of coalition scenarios or energy policies it goes way beyond it. Now the German political map today again I'm all enough remember when Germany was in a classic two-party system you know social democrats on the central left and the Christian democrats on the right now it's a mess so but the danger is that we could see in Germany as everywhere both in America and in Europe the growing strengths of the radicals on the far left and far right. So the German political map today has a greater number of MPs and growing of both I have the alternative for Germany far right and also two far left groups. So how do you describe this new the political realignment and how dangerous is the threat of this combined attacks on democracy from the far right and far left obviously the far right group is much bigger I have there one more than 20% in the last elections and I think they now their popularity level stands at nearly 25% so just give us just a little bit of a sense of this very dispersed political field so political map is quite messy for the traditional two-party system. This phenomenon I think I think it is simply the result of failed and unsuccessful centrist policies and the lack of credibility of centrist political leaders so if we tackle that problem we should first look at what did the centrist parties what did the older parties the political establishment do wrong and why feel people the need to look for alternatives and shift more to the extremes why are they seduced by the easy solutions and I think that is also a pretty global phenomenon where the extremes are getting stronger the center has made mistakes and should start with self-criticism. Now concretely to Germany both extremes are very dangerous and have some ideas that are very interconstitutional and particularly dangerous with regard to geopolitics and the future of open societies. Yeah I want to just talk a bit more about I have there turn to for Deutschland because the other far-right groups and parties like in France the Marie-Lapein or a Nigel Farage reform party in Great Britain they refuse to deal with AFD they believe it's too far-right and it has an open nostalgia for Nazi Germany so can it tell us more about the nature of this party and its threat it can represent to German democracy and to European integration because it's of course it's against against United Europe. Well I think indeed the foreign policy concept the geopolitical consequences of that are by far the biggest threat that this party provides the admiration for strong men and autocratic countries like almost Russia but also China and others reflect a totally different idea of society a different idea of leadership and also the consequences to politically would be horrific I think for the open society model and the world order that we are discussing today that's why I find it particularly hard to understand why this movement is so much more popular in the eastern states of Germany than in the western part of Germany and that is actually counterintuitive because you should think like other Eastern European countries who basically experienced Soviet communism and the ruthlessness of that system that should lead to a lot of realistic and skeptical expectations with regard to future relationships with Russia and the future influence of Russia or dealing with China but the opposite seems to be true and that is for me very hard to explain that honestly Gary I have no very convincing explanation for that let's talk about a synthesis to AFD not from east but from the west actually far far west in DC so there seems there are quite a few fans of AFD in Trump's administration definitely it's JD Vance or opal supported not just AFD but almost every far right political group in Europe that was fighting in the elections to get into power so how do you explain that well I think it would be particularly negative for the United States because in large parts of the party there is a deeply rooted anti-Americanist approach a deeply rooted anti-capitalist approach and how would be curious how that would play out with regard to the transatlantic relationship I mean just take the very concrete request or proposal no American weapons on German ground that's funny Putin will like that but it's not good for Germany now maybe some people in America may say well it's nice for America because we have lower expenses in that context but I think the price that the United States would pay in the long term for that would be enormous would go up definitely because a putting that is encouraged by such a move would not stop in Ukraine you would go further so am I hearing you saying that without America without American leadership the global democracy will be in in barrel and may collapse yes I think it's a very nice but slightly naive idea that now the big historic opportunity as since America is sending a lot of disturbing and surprising signals Europe could do it alone or could do it better it's not going to work the challenges of China the challenges of Russia and the challenges of Islamist dictatorships are much too big in order to be solved by Europe alone and I would even go that far they are also way too big than being solvable by the United States alone we'll go right back but let's look at this geopolitical chessboard the United States China and of course Russia is still there so it's a relatively small economy but you have nukes you have you know army you have crazy dictator who made war as an engine of of his power and what is Europe here because I think one of the problems between Europe and America now the way I think Trump administration's viewing Europe is Europe is divided it's too weak and Germany is not ready to play the leading role to United Europe and to make it speak with one voice that could put Europe and this negotiating and make you know European opinion European power to be counted do you believe that Europe still has has its potential again led by Germany to make herself relevant the short answer is yes Europe is a sleeping beauty it's just a great continent with wonderful countries and a beautiful probably the most attractive lifestyle in the world but it's also sleeping it's sleeping because it develops a very dangerous of a degree of complacency now the question is can that be changed and here my my take is more optimistic I think what is happening at the at the moment in the world is very disturbing and it can be the beginning of the end it can be the beginning of the end of the open society model of the idea of free rule space society of democracy of the rule of law of human rights and we will have a very different world order now being at the verge of that and seeing the dangers and facing a lot of volatility in the United States and a lot of rigor and aggression and non-democratic superpowers like China I think it has the potential to really be the healthy wake-up call the healthy wake-up call for democracy in the open society model and the healthy wake-up call for Europe and then I think that would be a re-evacaning of Europe and suddenly in 10 years the world can look completely different people I say wow what is shift of labor excellence know how value creation to European countries what a different world where these open societies stick together and build strategic alliances in the economy but also in the field of defense and security so I truly think we are at a pivotal moment we're both as possible the beginning of the end or the healthy wake-up call that starts a new decade a new century where Europe plays a more important and a better role you said I think sleeping beauty that's for me that doesn't cause any strength so it's basically waiting for courageous prince to wake wake her up with with a magic kiss is it sleeping beauty or sleeping giant that's a very good point it's a beautiful giant let's call it that's in any case that's an interesting mixture yeah it's in any case I mean we definitely agree that it's sleeping at the moment but I also agree with her criticism beauty is not enough and I think with the right injection of energy and ambition and aspiration it can be a new a new player and you're giant three and half years of war in Ukraine can hear them from Berlin wasn't it not enough to wake Europe up so how come that in three and half years Europe Europe has provided less help for Ukraine than North Korea for Russia uh you're still contemplating your next moves you don't want to see that um put in is that war with Europe it's a kind of hybrid war he has been openly interfering in elections in Germany in Romania in France in in Britain so everywhere um what else do you need to wake up and let's again go back to Germany so can Germany just take a lead three and a half years have been lost so what what does come next first of all Gary I totally agree with your analysis uh secondly I don't have a very good answer why it's still sleeping I wrote a text a few days after the uh invasion in Ukraine and said this is now a moment where the west has to act where NATO members have to act whether it's under article five or not but this is the moment where we have to show strength because only strength and military uh um deterrence is avoiding an escalation and is avoiding a bigger and long-lasting conflict and if we don't do that the price is going to be higher I was criticized as a warmonger I was criticized to risk a nuclear escalation and so on so from a today's perspective it feels quite sad because I still think and I'm still deeply convinced had we acted faster and more determinedly we could have avoided a large uh degree of what has happened since then and now we in a much worse place nevertheless I think it is not too late and if you just take also the the percentage of budgets that NATO members and the west is basically investing in order to stop Putin it is so minor it is so minimal compared to what Putin is investing and that leads me to the very simple uh result if we would want to stop that we could stop it and there is I don't know it's a mix of opportunism and naivety and also a wrong narrative that only if we are nice to Putin and if we are not focusing too much on on military force only then we can calm him down which is so wrong it is with reading so much the mind of almost all totalitarian leaders and particularly of Putin who is basically testing the west and always seeing how far can he go and further we let him go the more he will do and the higher the price is going to be so it is already late it's not too late but we we wasted a lot of time again realistically so whatever we say about NATO and its historical role the role is played over 75 years I mean it's it's dead now it's not functioning and uh and definitely next three plus years while Trump at the office nobody expects NATO to uh to be what it used to be or just that's the organization that we we we relied upon for for for decades um share your optimism that you know eventually there will be some kind of new alignment or realignment in the European-American relations the global democracies will get together but that's in the future but currently we have the war so can Germany in your opinion lead this new defense alliance as the prototype for the future uh future version of NATO to make sure that this war can be won or at least Ukraine can survive the Russia onslaught and and um what are the what are the limits for Germany in building such alliance how realistic is is to envision the German role as the as an engine for this defense coalition can Germany do that yes Germany can do that will Germany do that is more complex and tier I think there is one psychological reason why there is a risk that it's not happening and I mentioned that already it is history it is a bit this fear of taking military leadership I mean the world was fearing for decades for good reasons for German military uh initiatives for military ambitions for the way for military leadership and I think that is also a very very kind of poisoned ground and that may lead to more reluctance than we need and that could be a reason why it's not happening or why it's not happening fast enough but if I may let us also not forget the possibility that something happens that may be surprising from a today's perspective but psychologically not unlikely and that is the more Putin plays with Trump the more he publicly embarrasses Trump gaining time not making real concessions not sticking to agreements the more Donald Trump could feel provoked and if Putin continues to do that then I think Trump could surprise everybody by really changing his mind completely and then we could have a totally different situation not only psychologically but also militarily I'm afraid you're dreamer Matthias maybe I am a dreamer yeah but do you really think that is realistic that Trump leaves the field as the loser having been kind of outsmarted by Putin and basically saying okay I resign I you you you want Vladimir I just leave the battlefield as a loser I for me it's also hard to imagine simply psychologically yes but Trump psychology it's just it's it's always to turn any any failure into victory so um okay that now just going to the end of of our conversation so let's let's concentrate on what Germany could shoot and hopefully will do so uh will Germany move on with the rearman plans so investing heavily in in this uh million industrial complex building new weapons and um becoming becoming a military military powerhouse again I think the likelihood is very high if you just look to the kind of changes in social behavior just a few years ago people from the defense industry were not even invited to dinner parties today they are stars of dinner parties everybody talks to them they are perceived as heroes they are perceived as uh guards of freedom and democracy so the mindset has really fundamentally changed and also the number of startups that is dealing with drones and is dealing with new technologies of defense is skyrocketing um people are preparing for that and everybody sees the need for that so the likelihood that that mindset changes is it's pretty so uh do you think that it's realistic that Germany will also build its strong army that will become a core of this uh no the military uh barrier uh against potential Russian aggression that's a long shot uh I don't know how developed the willingness of uh German people is to defend that country I think it's already tough to defend our country and even tougher to defend but maybe I have a slightly uh maybe my my take is to a negative here but yeah no that's it's very important here because I'm I'm afraid you know I I share your pessimism here but you know all these all these guns you know all these uh shells all these drones they they are not too effective without uh the the willpower behind it without manpower behind right and it seems to me that Germany is is yet to cross this road so it's the it's like from you know West Berlin to Israel so just from from this historical guilt you know from this uh peace mongering to to war reality can you imagine just you know that's it's it's as a part of this coalition Germany may uh develop uh nuclear weapons to to deter Russian unlikely unlikely yeah so that means that Germany will always depend on other countries because in in the the successful deterrence is not yes Russia well not work without nuclear umbrella so who will provide nuclear umbrella if during Trump's years France Britain how do you think Germany will manage it maybe France and Britain will play a bigger role uh that's a possibility but again I think um without america it's going to be very tough that's why it isn't our very vital interest to keep a healthy relationship with america regardless whether we like the government or uh not um it's a over-arcing um uh paradigm I think for for your opinion for for Germany so uh just very final question so you uh just give us the next three years just for the next three years of Trump administration what will be the ideal outcome so for us to to dream about 2028 from the journal perspective strong German leadership leads to conceptual priorities one is to lead europe in military strength and uh support in Ukraine in defense in order to limit uh Putin's aggression that will impress the united states because a stronger europe will be taking more seriously and europe that does more for his own defense will be more credible as a partner to negotiate deals on other levels and the second thing will be changed in Germany and in europe and that is that uh we reach out to america agreeing on a mutual strategy trade strategy towards china defend that strategy together at the negotiation table achieve a much much better deal with china that strengthens europe and america that we can support that limits china that strengthens the democratic world that will be the beginning of a new prosperous uh era for america america first from an american perspective and a stronger europe europe first former european perspective but based on mutual values excelling together that would be the most optimistic outcome that would strengthen the open society model and freedom and democracy but uh Gary honestly this is the ultimate degree of optimism that i can develop at this stage let's work on that let's hope for it but let's not count on it prepare for the worst in order to get positively surprised yes we can prepare for the worst but it's very important to have a vision and thank you very much for laying down this positive vision matter so and i hope that at least part of this vision will be realized soon that would be something and the first of all is of course you for Ukraine a to survive b to win and eventually put in regime to collapse and and europe to to become a real geopolitical player to wake up from from its sleep and uh to become a as you said beautiful giant on the world stage wonderful i totally agree yes thank you very much Matthias thank you thank you Gary this episode of autocracy in america was produced by Arlene Araval our editor is Dave Shaw original music and mix by Rob Smersiak fact checking by Anna Alvarado special thanks to political sparrow and McGringert including the bait is the executive producer of Atlantic audio and revolver is our managing editor next time on autocracy in america we are an example that a country can live could have a great standard can have free speech can have human rights in quite a short time and i think that is the painful thing for Kremlin they do not want to see successful countries from the former empire because it might lead their people to think that there is another way there is another track for their country as well and that is definitely very scary for their regime i'm Gary Kasparov see you back here next week you
