Europe has long been a continent shaped by war — but it also once reaped the benefits of a peace dividend through diplomacy and stability. 🕊️⚡
Now, with the West’s "war for peace" project in Ukraine facing serious challenges, the question remains: will Europe move toward renewed conflict or seek a diplomatic resurgence?
Oksana Boyko sits down with Ola Tunander, Emeritus Professor at the Peace Research Institute Oslo, to discuss Europe's historical crossroads, the lessons from past conflicts, and the path forward in an increasingly volatile world. 🧠🌐
A deep and timely conversation you don't want to miss!
#WorldsApart #OksanaBoyko #OlaTunander #PeaceDividend #WarOrPeace #EuropeConflict #UkraineCrisis #Geopolitics #PeaceResearch #EuropeanPolitics #WarHistory #Diplomacy #InternationalRelations #ConflictResolution #WestVsEast #UkraineWar #GlobalPolitics #EmeritusProfessor #PeaceStudies #FutureOfEurope
Now, with the West’s "war for peace" project in Ukraine facing serious challenges, the question remains: will Europe move toward renewed conflict or seek a diplomatic resurgence?
Oksana Boyko sits down with Ola Tunander, Emeritus Professor at the Peace Research Institute Oslo, to discuss Europe's historical crossroads, the lessons from past conflicts, and the path forward in an increasingly volatile world. 🧠🌐
A deep and timely conversation you don't want to miss!
#WorldsApart #OksanaBoyko #OlaTunander #PeaceDividend #WarOrPeace #EuropeConflict #UkraineCrisis #Geopolitics #PeaceResearch #EuropeanPolitics #WarHistory #Diplomacy #InternationalRelations #ConflictResolution #WestVsEast #UkraineWar #GlobalPolitics #EmeritusProfessor #PeaceStudies #FutureOfEurope
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00hello and welcome to worlds apart historically the european continent is well ahead of all others in
00:21terms of the number the scale and the deadliness of the wars fought on its territory and until
00:27recently europe has also been one of the major recipients of the so-called peace dividend
00:33the prosperity and growth that came from managing geopolitical tensions diplomatically
00:38which way is it likely to lean now after the west's latest war for peace project in ukraine
00:45seems to have run aground well to discuss that i'm now joined by ola tunander an emeritus professor
00:52at the peace research institute oslo professor tunander it's great to talk to you thank you
00:56very much for being available thank you now i just mentioned the peace dividend that the european
01:02policy makers used to mention quite a lot just a couple of years ago as one of the major achievements
01:08of the post-world war ii era and that peace dividend to a large extent came from a very profitable
01:15economic cooperation first with the soviet union and then later on with russia and yet it was also very
01:21easily given up upon once the conflict in ukraine began to escalate do you think without this material
01:29or even mercantilist benefit uh do you think peace in europe is possible i think it's possible but uh but
01:37i think it's very problematic at the moment because i think among the the new generation of political
01:46leaders and journalists they are actually they they don't have a professional experience from the cold
01:55war so they they think in terms of of the being able to tell the opponent how to behave it is uh you
02:07could say it's a kind of hubris it is a the experience is from the from the wars on the ball on the balkans
02:16on in the iraq war in the libya war which all were catastrophic of course in many ways but
02:26the western countries were superior from a military point of view
02:31and in relation to russia that is not the case i think it's really problematic because it's a kind
02:39of a generation that could not admit that we are having a conflict with an equal
02:49professor i think you don't need to have an immediate experience of something to understand the potential
02:56dangers or benefits of it for example i mean we don't need to fight with you personally for me to understand
03:00that you know i could face certain consequences and uh yet it seems that the current generation of
03:08policy makers or journalists that you're referring to is also pretty much oblivious to the entire
03:15history of the 20th century that our continent has went through i mean you have this wonderful uh
03:20very evocative painting behind your back uh you know showing the the horrors and the suffering of
03:27the people in the world war ii that happened on our continent and yet for some reason it seems to be
03:36not penetrating to the to the kind of leads that you're talking about i know quite a few people
03:43who who has positions at a time and are part of the advisory boards and so on and but they are
03:54they lack the understanding of what you had during the cold war that you could actually had an escalation
04:04to nuclear and and this is forgotten i would say and they know it from reading the books they don't
04:14believe in it anyway okay if they don't know about it let's try to educate them a little bit on that and
04:20you have written quite extensively about the underpinnings of russian security thinking i think
04:26it's um it doesn't really change from leader to leader or from ideology to ideology because
04:32it's not political it's ultimately rooted in in in the survival of russia as a state and you have
04:38written in your articles that historically major threats to russian to russian state came from the west
04:46uh those attacks you know went deep into the russian territory and that's why the russian leadership
04:51regardless of of its uh regardless of its ideology thinks that it is wise to have a certain uh buffer
04:58around russia and what we have in ukraine right now it's not really about ukraine it's about the
05:03square footage that ukraine is sitting upon why do you think it was important uh for the west to try to
05:10put that to a test because i mean this is not something that putin has invented this has been
05:15there for centuries it it is a it is a problem uh when i think in britain and united states or parts of the
05:26u.s elite and part of the british elite actually are very used to deception that you fool your enemy but
05:37also your friend and that is uh that is one of the more problematic sites because of course we know
05:46how many people would know and uh you could you could just read the cables from uh bill burns the
05:55the former director of the cia and that at 2008 he was a ambassador to moscow so it was very clear
06:05that he took the russian way of thinking seriously and this was a red line ukraine was a red line for
06:14definitely a red line for for russia and so they knew it and and the problem i think was that they had
06:25uh immediately then war started they claimed that russia wanted to conquer the ukraine or conquer the whole
06:37of ukraine while for example the russian side and the ukraine side said that they wanted they wanted to
06:46who who have a neutral ukraine that was what they said and but no not one single journalist not one single
06:57political political leaders in the west said that and then you have to wonder what does it come from
07:04and i think that you start a narrative immediately after an event
07:13and that creates the kind of fake understanding of the situation professor you have also written that
07:20unlike the russian fixation on uh this uh buffer protection zone uh western security strategists
07:28think in terms of deterrence containment and rollback and i wonder what's the point as far as you are
07:35concerned what's the point beyond which in their view russia needs to be contained is there
07:42any level of uh russia's relative success or well-being as a state that would not be deemed as
07:49threatening to these people from the strategic community in britain and in the u.s or you know part
08:00the neoconservatives in the u.s they they would consider russia as a threat
08:06uh whatever they do i mean i think that for example in the at the end of the cold war
08:14president george hw bush and his uh secretary of state baker they were very seriously talking with
08:24garbachev and promised a lot of things and uh while the national security advisor scowcroft wrote
08:34internally that united states should move forward and place itself between german and russia so so
08:45and this was actually or germany and soviet union this was like late 89 so it was a it was a dual strategy
08:56from from from the west side but you you had a nice facade when you spoke with garbachev and then you had a
09:08real strategy that the idea was to move forward after so it's a policy of deception and not only deceiving
09:16your opponent but i assume also your domestic population now you mentioned the cold war when russia was
09:23recognized as an enemy and as a powerful enemy because it had nuclear weapons and nuclear deterrent
09:30is a very interesting concept in geostrategic studies because ultimately it's a way to compensate for your
09:36lack or shortage in uh conventional military capabilities and the country that has nuclear weapons
09:42can guarantee its survival before the war in ukraine uh began in its kinetic form i think we saw
09:51a sort of uh sort of uh total um lack of recognition i guess that russia has those nuclear weapons do you
09:59think it was uh ignorance or do you think it was a deliberate attempt perhaps to nullify the advantages
10:06that nuclear weapons give to russia strategically because ultimately it's always been pretty clear that it
10:11will use them if its vital interests are threatened i think uh i i saw an interview with michael clark
10:21uh who was heading the royal united services institute in britain and uh professor in defense studies
10:30and also i've been uh in uh in politics also and and he said that uh we don't believe in any nuclear threat
10:43problem any kind of problem with that and the scandinavians and the baltics had the same view
10:52while the germans and the south europeans are more worried about nuclear weapons
10:59so yeah and and i think his argument was that if russia if russia use nuclear weapons
11:05uh we could use nuclear weapons against russia so it doesn't make sense the problem is i would say that
11:16that now russia has a conventional missiles that are quite capable so like the orashnik missile
11:27that could take out uh air bases in any european country and the problem is that the british has
11:39nothing to respond with in that so it's so in that sense it would be britain that goes nuclear and
11:48and russia would in that case would be would be much stronger so and i don't think the u.s will try to
11:57involve actually i think the u.s at least the present administration but but they for them if they
12:08would attack the ukola peninsula for example the murmansk naval bases russia would attack uh norfolk
12:17naval air station naval oil stations close to washington it is a it's no point for for united states to
12:29involve itself and in that sense you could say that the nuclear umbrella that uh nato has been so proud
12:37about really doesn't exist now can i ask you about this because it is pretty um amazing i guess and
12:45surprising for us to see that the thinking in washington has changed and that uh the new
12:50administration in washington at least takes not russia but nuclear weapons seriously but i think the old
12:56thinking in europe continues and europe seems to believe that you know russia can still be put in an
13:03into a position it wants how long do you think this uh division between uh uh europe western europe and
13:10the united states uh will last do you think europe has or what it takes to sustain it i think that if you
13:18look at the threat assessment recent for me a few days ago from the trump administration from the
13:26from the in u.s intelligence community they write very clearly that if they will continue the war
13:37and that would mean for example security guarantees for ukraine or something like that that would mean a war
13:44war a shooting war a shooting war between u.s and russia and that would easily escalate
13:52or to a nuclear war so and that is i mean clearly stated that this is you could not have the security
14:01guarantees because it is a and and i think what happens now in europe with the european countries that they
14:11believe that their deterrence is so amazing so they so the russians wouldn't dare to do anything well
14:20that's an interesting thing they don't believe uh that russia would use uh nuclear weapons or that
14:26russian nukes are serious and yet they somehow rely on the american uh protection and take it seriously
14:32that's quite a paradoxical way of thinking but let's discuss it after a short break we need to take it right
14:38now but we will be back in just a couple of minutes stay tuned
14:52what is bharat is it a travel ad
15:10is it a bollywood poster
15:14is it the deepest yoga center in the world or is it something deeper more complex multifaceted let's
15:22talk without cliches let's talk bharat
15:31I was born with the father of the son, because my father was born, and I did not see the father of the son.
15:42I was born with the father of the son, so they didn't get away, and he was born with the people who were born.
15:51The Assyrians, just like the Armenians, were forced to flee their homeland.
16:21The Assyrians, the Assyrians, were forced to flee their homeland by the 24th of 1915.
16:32Welcome back to Worlds Apart with Ola Tanander, an Emeritus Professor at the Peace Research Institute, Oslo.
16:53Professor, just before the break, we were talking about nuclear weapons and nuclear deterrent and that European nations believe that they have the nuclear capacity or the nuclear umbrella provided by the Americans,
17:06even though they don't believe that the Russian nuclear weapons represent the threat to them.
17:11That's quite a paradox.
17:13But there are many other paradoxes in the European strategic thinking.
17:18And one of the reasons why Americans are no longer willing to finance the war in Ukraine is because they see no benefit for themselves.
17:26What are the benefits for the Europeans to keep on this war track?
17:31What do you think they are trying to achieve for themselves?
17:33They have painted themselves into a corner.
17:37They could not back out.
17:39And they are unable to understand security politics, I would say.
17:46I mean, you had the General Secretary of NATO before from Norway, and his background was, he studied economy.
18:03He had no study security politics.
18:07He was not.
18:08And the problem, then, is that you have to listen to your advisors.
18:16And if you don't know too much yourself, you have to listen to your advisors.
18:22And they might have a very different agenda.
18:27They may actually want to have a war.
18:32I mean, if you go back to this professor, British professor, Michael Clarke, he was worried about Biden in the last autumn.
18:43He was worried about Biden that he didn't want to use the long-range missiles against Russia.
18:51Because he was afraid of an escalating war.
18:58And he didn't want to have a war in the last minute of his presidency.
19:05It looked bad.
19:06So, the problem was the White House said, this is my public talk.
19:13And this is a kind of thinking that I think is pretty dangerous.
19:18You know, just the other day, talking about this kind of thinking and the kind of understanding of security policy in Europe,
19:26the German economy minister said the other day that the EU needs to increase the pressure on Trump and to see who is stronger at arm wrestling.
19:36If you had to put your own money on that, which side would you side on?
19:41Trump or the new German economy minister?
19:46I'm not going into that.
19:48But I don't think that it's very – I think the Germans have behaved extremely irrational.
20:00And not least when it comes to, you know, the role of the Nord Stream pipeline, which is, you know, catastrophic.
20:09The economy, absolutely.
20:11You know, the energy resources, the market for your goods, etc.
20:16All of that was lost.
20:17I mean, the Germans are one of the biggest losers.
20:19Of course, they lost more than Russia, you could say, when it comes to the Nord Stream pipeline.
20:26So, it is catastrophic for Germany.
20:32And they accepted it.
20:35And that is – you could say that was a sign of a vessel status for Germany in relation to the United States.
20:45The problem now is that the United States has changed 90 degrees.
20:50And now, people in Europe don't know what to do.
20:56So, it is a – it's very, very strange.
21:00I mean, in the 1980s, you had kind of independent thinking in Germany.
21:11You have the – you know, you have – or in the 70s also, you have the Ostpolitik of Willy Brandt.
21:16And you have the – Helmut Schmidt, who was, you know, pushing very much for – for the pipe – for the gas pipeline.
21:24And while the Americans wanted to cut it, they actually succeeded to detonate or destroy the pipeline somewhere in Siberia in 1982.
21:38But the Germans and the Soviets continued building the pipelines, and they couldn't stop it.
21:44And the Europeans were all on board for the pipeline, even the British.
21:49But now, they have succeeded to change this.
21:53So, it is a – I think it's amazing how weak the Europeans have been.
21:59Well, Professor, in a paradoxical way, the war in Ukraine, the current developments at least, allow the Europeans to demonstrate for the first time in many decades that they have at least a semblance of strategic autonomy from Washington.
22:14How do you think they are likely to use it?
22:16I don't know.
22:18I don't know.
22:19I think it's – I think they are – you know, they will – could easily get into a lot of trouble.
22:29I mean, they will try to have some kind of a security guarantee for Ukraine.
22:38And, of course, they believe in a way that Britain and France is strong enough to, you know, to really push the Russians back.
22:56And that is – I think that from a Russian point of view, if there would be British or French troops coming in, they would be a primary target.
23:12So, it is a – and then, of course, comes the question, how will the Europeans react?
23:20And, of course, to a large extent, they will react to say that, you know, the Russians are very evil and so on, and we have to fight them, and we might have a big war in Europe.
23:33But, as I understand, the Russians are not interested in moving troops westwards at all.
23:41So, they – but they would – if they feel – if they feel – if the Russians are threatened by U.S. or British air bases in the vicinity of Russia, then they will take them out.
23:58If the war that will include the European countries.
24:03Professor, I know that you have also researched the war in Libya, which I covered as a reporter on the ground,
24:09and it was a pretty heartbreaking experience to see how a relatively prosperous country can be thrown into dark ages in just a matter of months.
24:19But, to some extent, it's also a blueprint of what the Western operation can do to a country, because the West moves in,
24:28then it leaves the country, disposes of its leadership, leaves the country in a state of savagery,
24:34which I think what happened to Libya, and goes on.
24:39Now, do you think such scenario is likely for Ukraine?
24:43How do you think the West is likely to deal with the Ukraine going forward?
24:47The British Foreign Office, or the Parliament's Foreign Affairs Committee, made a pretty serious investigation.
25:00And they found, for example, that there were no – there were no real threats to the population in Libya from Gaddafi's side.
25:10I mean, this was just made up by certain agencies.
25:15Absolutely. There were lots of fake reports. I can tell that as somebody who was on the ground.
25:19You know, all these concocted reports of Gaddafi's Viagra and the soldiers doing mass rapes,
25:26that has all been proven wrong, and yet it got – at that time, it got a lot of support from the officials in Western capitals.
25:34And it was kind of mass killings to a certain extent, but that was the Islamist rebels who was responsible for that in Taberga, for example, as you –
25:48Well, and so it was – it was just fake pretext, I mean, that they were brought up.
25:59And you could – if you compare it to Ukraine, there were some killings in the Donbass 2014 to – and 2015 and onwards,
26:11and killing some 14,000 people and 3,400, I think, civilians, and this was not understood as a reason for responsibility to protect operation or something like that.
26:32So, it was clear that international law is used for your own purpose.
26:42And the tragic thing, I think, is that the political leaders – I mean, leaders that I know, and, you know, they believe in what they are saying.
26:56They actually believe in what has, you know, that responsibility from the Russian side, and they – and in general, I think that political leaders, they have too much to do.
27:15They have no time for going into depth.
27:17They have an intelligence service that manipulates the information you are truly dependent on.
27:27Well, I think one similarity between the conflict in Libya and the current conflict in Ukraine is that both of them have produced very large refugee waves into the European countries.
27:39And whether or not European leaders take time to study security policy history or what have you, you know, the citizens of their countries can feel the brunt of those policies, you know, in their own lives.
27:54It means increased social spending.
27:56It means increase in crimes.
27:58There are many other negative consequences.
28:00And I wonder what is it about the European way of processing reality that allows not only for the leadership but also for the large populations to stay blind and unresponsive to this kind of reality feedback because everything shows that these policies are not working, that they are hurting not only the other countries but also the European countries themselves.
28:29It's impossible to understand.
28:59There is no kind of this kind of conclusions.
29:07Well, Professor, reality by its very nature is inconclusive and uncertain.
29:11So I guess we will also have to leave this interview without any certain answers to my questions.
29:17But I appreciate your being here.
29:19Thank you very much for that.
29:21Thank you very much.
29:23And thank you for watching.
29:24Hope to see you again on Worlds Apart.
29:29Hope to see you again on Worlds.
29:30Hope to see you again on Worlds.
29:31Hope to see you again on Worlds.
29:32Hope to see you again on Worlds.
29:33Hope to see you again on Worlds.
29:34Hope to see you again on Worlds.
29:35Hope to see you again on Worlds.
29:36Hope to see you again on Worlds.
29:37Hope to see you again on Worlds.
29:38Hope to see you again on Worlds.
29:39Hope to see you again on Worlds.
29:40Hope to see you again on Worlds.
29:41Hope to see you again on Worlds.
29:42Hope to see you again on Worlds.
29:43Hope to see you again on Worlds.
29:44Hope to see you again on Worlds.
29:45Hope to see you again on Worlds.
29:46Hope to see you again on Worlds.
29:47Hope to see you again on Worlds.
29:48Hope to see you again on Worlds.
29:49Hope to see you again on Worlds.
29:50Hope to see you again on Worlds.