3 Takeaways - Former Supreme Allied Commander of NATO James Stavridis Does Not Mince Words (#233)

Episode Date: January 21, 2025

When Admiral James Stavridis (Ret) talks, everyone from Hillary Clinton to Donald Trump listens. Here, the brilliant former Supreme Allied Commander of NATO shares his thoughts on the U.S. relationship with China; how to fundamentally remake the Middle East; how the U.S. should “own” Greenland, the impact of AI on the power of nations; and more.

Did the United States' disastrous exit from Afghanistan and the perception of U.S. weakness contribute to Vladimir Putin's invasion of Ukraine and also to the Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iranian attacks on Israel? How can the U.S. and other countries better ensure global safety and security? Hi everyone, I'm Lynn Toman and this is Three Takeaways. On Three Takeaways, I talk with some of the world's best thinkers, business leaders, writers, politicians, newsmakers, and scientists.

Each episode ends with three key takeaways to help us understand the world and maybe even ourselves a little better. Today I'm excited to be with Admiral James Stavridis. Admiral Stavridis is a retired four-star officer who served as Supreme Allied Commander of NATO. Before that, he was Commander of was commander of US Southern Command with responsibility for all military operations in Latin America and prior

to that he served at sea in aircraft carriers cruisers and destroyers. He is currently vice chair global affairs at the Carlisle Group and chair of the board of the Rockefeller Foundation. In addition, he is a bestselling author who has published, I think, 14 books and hundreds of articles in leading journals around the world. Welcome, Admiral Stavridis, and thank you for your service in the military and also for joining three takeaways today. It's my pleasure. service in the military and also for joining three takeaways today. It's my pleasure. And by the way, Lynn, whenever I meet a teacher at any level from higher education to elementary school, I say to all teachers, thank you

for your service as well. Thank you. You've written wonderful but scary novels about the next world war. How could the world stumble into war? Winston Churchill said that the further into the future you want to look, the more you have to dive into the past. When I think about the United States and China, as you say, stumbling around in the Pacific. I often think about 1914 in Europe. Here you see these great powers, these empires, Ottoman Empire, the Austro-Hungarian Empire, the German Hohenzollern Empire, all of these maneuvering around each other, yet an assassin's bullet in Sarajevo

creates a conflagration that starts a war. So the short answer to your question is a miscalculation. Miscalculation is a very real concern. What impact do you think that the US's disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan has had. It's emboldened our opponents around the world, and it has also created skepticism in the minds of our allies. And we ought to recognize those are two sides of the same coin. If our opponents like Vladimir Putin are emboldened by what he saw, he will then have more of a propensity, for example, to invade Ukraine. President Xi in China might say, hmm, United States may not

come to the aid of Taiwan. It might increase the odds of him attacking. Conversely, our allies, NATO, of course, but also Japan, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand, our Pacific allies, for example, all of them look at the way we walked away from 20 years of investment in Afghanistan and walked away from allies, partners and friends on the ground there. And it disheartens them. So, yes, that withdrawal was a debacle and it has long term knock on effects, which will not be good for the United States of America.

And it's also had effects on our military as well. It has indeed. And I'm old enough to remember the war in Vietnam and the shameful ending there. And this is another version of that same story of the United States spending an enormous amount of blood and treasure and then at the end of the day, effectively shrugging and walking away. That's what happened in Vietnam in 1975. That's what happened tragically in Afghanistan at the beginning of the Biden administration. Admiral, how do you see China?

The challenge with China, Lin, is the strategic challenge of the 21st century. Only China can mount a significant challenge to the U.S. in everything from technology and artificial intelligence to competition for alliance systems, to economic power and throw weight through the application of tariffs by both sides to actual military confrontation. Only China can pose that level of risk for the United States. So I look at China, I'm hopeful we can construct a strategy that says confront where we must, but cooperate where we can with China. We've got to confront China on their claim of ownership of the South China Sea. It's preposterous. We've got to confront them on the possibility they may

invade Taiwan, which would crack the global economy. We got to confront them on their highly aggressive cyber activity, for example. There's a basket of things where we cannot bend, but we ought to look for the zones of cooperation with China in everything from the environment and climate to preparing for the next pandemic, to disaster relief around the world, to shared economic potential agreements that could be positive both ways. There's a lot of scope for cooperation with China. We need a strategy that's not an either or, carrot or stick. It's got to be both.

China is the strategic risk for the United States this century. You mentioned Taiwan. What, in your opinion, are some of the likeliest ways that China could attempt to increase influence or even take over Taiwan? Your question is framed exactly right, Lyn. Too often people immediately jump to, is China going to invade and conquer Taiwan? I think that's highly unlikely. The cost to China and blood and treasure and international influence would be extreme. But I think what China could do, for example, is do a blockade or a soft blockade on certain

products around Taiwan. China could use cyber very effectively to surreptitiously undermine the economy of Taiwan. China could use soft power, continue to try and convince the Chinese of Taiwan that, oh no, your natural place is here with us. I think China in that regard, by the way, did itself no favors in the treatment of Hong Kong. The Taiwanese were watching very closely as China cracked down on Hong Kong. And so China has some work to do to try and use soft power. But across that spectrum that kind of runs from blockade to cyber to cultural engagement to soft power incentives, China's got a lot of cards to play and I think they'll

play them. We need to ensure that the people of Taiwan are the ones who decide where their future lies. I'm convinced they will want to continue to be, as they are today, a thriving democracy. Our job is to give them the means to maintain that path if that's what they choose, and I think they will. What do you think that the US and other countries should do with respect to China? You've mentioned Taiwan, you've mentioned the South China Sea and cyber.

The number one thing we need to do, good old fashioned kind of idea, is to have a plan, to have a strategy. We're lacking that. What we tend to do is respond tactically, operationally, maybe a sporadic diplomatic initiative. A strategy would have at least five components off the top of my head. One would be tech because the foot race for artificial intelligence quantum computing is going to be critical. Number two, diplomatic.

We're going to want to shore up our alliance systems and not just in Asia, but really in Latin America, the Caribbean, sub-Saharan Africa, Global South. Sure up those alliances. What's the diplomatic strategy? Asia, but really in Latin America, the Caribbean, Sub-Saharan Africa, Global South, shore up those alliances. What's the diplomatic strategy to contend with China? Number three, military. We need a strong, capable military. We have that. It needs to remain strong and particularly in systems that create deterrence in the mind of China, maritime, strategic nuclear, cyber. Fourth, we need a cultural, educational, athletic exchange. It doesn't all have to be confrontation. We need to find zones of cooperation. You and I have talked about private public partnering. This is an area that's absolutely rich in those possibilities.

And then finally, maybe the biggest is economics. What is the economic strategy? Are we going to try and hold our market away from China by using massive tariffs? We could do that. It'll cause China to respond with massive tariffs. We'll lose that market. We'd be in a confrontation. We need to strategically think about which tariffs to apply,

when to apply them, who cooperates with us. Do we go back to the idea of a Pacific free trade zone, for example? So you need an economic component. So Lin, the first and most important thing we have to do is step back from the problem, bring very bright people together and create an actual strategy to contend with the challenge of China. And how do you see the Middle East?

Is that similar? I think in the Middle East, it's much more of a tactical set of initiatives, but I'll give you one big strategic thing we could do that would be helpful. What you're seeing at the moment is a checkerboard of individual fires as Israel breaks Hamas, breaks Hezbollah, Assad is driven out. The Houthis are going to be next in the target package. And then ultimately there'll be real pressure brought on Iran. And that kind of set of tactical back and forth, I think is going to continue for the immediate future next couple of years. Here's the strategic point we should be pursuing. We ought to try and bring Israel and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia together. And what I mean by that is encourage the Kingdom not only to diplomatically recognize Israel, but also to deepen its cooperation

with Israel in everything from missile defense to economics to intelligence, special forces, the band of cooperation potentially between Israel and the kingdom, the two strongest military powers in the region is very powerful, very profound. The US could best engender that by making it a tripartite security arrangement. Israel, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, United States. We seem to be facing a range of maritime security crises, including Europe where internet cables on the seafloor have been tampered with, the Middle East where where the Houthis in Yemen are firing on ships traversing the Red Sea, the South China

Sea, which you mentioned, where China is reinforcing its claim to the whole South China Sea by building up and fortifying small islands, and the Arctic Sea, where the ice is melting and navigation is increasing. How do you see these issues? Who is securing the oceans and the seas and who will pay for it? Yes, you have the right shopping list of horrors. I'll just add to it an even broader environmental concern.

Yes, the ice is melting. That'll have significant geopolitical impact in the north as those shipping routes become more accessible, as more oil and gas becomes exploitable. So yes, you're going to be creating a geopolitical maritime thunderdome up in the high north where, oh, by the way, on one side are all NATO nations, way on one side are all NATO nations, US, Canada, Denmark by virtue of Greenland, Iceland, Sweden, Finland, and Norway. Who's on the other side of the Thunderdome? It's Russia, obviously. So you have a built-in zip code for war in the North. Let's hope we can avoid it. But in addition to all the things things you mentioned, Lynn, I think actually the

biggest challenge in the oceans is environmental. It is the increasing temperatures in the ocean, the acidification of the oceans, the plastics in the oceans. There's a sea of plastics the size of Texas, literally in the center of the the size of Texas, literally in the center of the Pacific Ocean. All of that is going to have massive impact over time, rising sea levels that will wipe out coastal cities, fisheries dying off, conflict over all of that. And ultimately, the real danger is oxygen. Seventy percent of the oxygen we breathe comes from the ocean due to photosynthesis in the ocean.

So in addition to all the tactical, horrible, manmade things we can do in the oceans, the inexorable climate challenge, I think, is very profound. And to conclude with the answer to your question, who's going to pay for this? Who's going to police the oceans? It's got to be all of us. The United States ought to lead in that, but that's got to be an all hands on deck effort. Traditionally countries with large militaries and large and powerful military equipment, such as aircraft carriers, had an advantage. Is that still the case? Well certainly if you look at the

events in the Ukraine War, what was the first most significant Russian warship sunk in the Ukraine War? It was their flagship, the Moskva. The Moskva, their flagship, was destroyed, sunk, with the loss of probably four or five hundred sailors by the Ukrainians. Here's the punchline, Lin. Ukraine has no Navy anymore. Russia had already taken out most of their Navy. So what sunk this massive Russian Slava class cruiser? The answer is a combination of drones, hyperlinked intelligence that could target it, space intelligence and cruise missiles. So to answer your question, do you still have an automatic built in advantage from having really big ships on the surface?

Nope. It's not an on and off switch of, yeah, let's get rid of all of our carriers. Let's build only submarines and use drones, or let's just keep doing what we're doing. It's kind of a dimmer, a rheostat that you dial in. We're going to have to move toward more of these unmanned underwater systems. But for the moment, I'll still take that American aircraft carrier into combat with me. What do you think the future of war looks like with all these new technologies, inexpensive drones, unmanned weapons, cyber, AI? I think a good place to look is Ukraine. And here in Ukraine, you see something I think quite remarkable. It's really two wars in one.

I'll put it in the context of novels. You've probably read All Quiet on the Western Front by Remarque. It's a novel about World War I. World War I. Right. And what you read in that novel of over a hundred years ago is trenches, tanks, artillery battles, hand-to-hand combat, blood, mud. That's Ukraine. On the other hand, right alongside that in Ukraine, another novel Starship Troopers by

Robert Heinlein about the future of war hundreds of years from now. And that new face of war is drones, artificial intelligence, high end special forces, cyber warfare, all of that is changing the face of war. So at the moment you see both on the battlefield. I think that if I were betting and anyone who's investing is betting, you're gonna bet that that dial is turning pretty rapidly toward the high-end technologies. But don't make the mistake of thinking that the fundamental things that I talked about are just gonna go away with a snap of the finger. How will artificial intelligence affect the power of nations? The one word answer is immensely, but let's be practical and pull it into power and military

activities. I'll give you four very quick examples of where AI will help drive warfare and help nations win wars. One is logistics and the other is maintenance. But AI with the ability to tell you that within the next 72 days, that tank tread is going to fail. That's invaluable to a commander. And the same AI can logistically say, we better get that new tank tread up to the battlefield in Kursk. So maintenance and logistics, which believe me are the actual mother's milk of warfare, are going to be driven by AI and the side that is ahead will be the side that wins.

Now let's shift to, let's say you're a young Captain Stavridis, the captain of a destroyer, you're 37 years old, you're going into combat. What if you had an AI perched on your shoulder, figuratively, that was able to say, Captain, you need to immediately raise the defensive component of your Aegis radars and increase the level of sensors that you are deploying into this zone. The AI can do that because the AI is simultaneously looking at every battle ever fought in human history, and synthesizing it in a way that is immediate, understandable, and practical to young Captain Stavridis. And then fourth and finally, Lin, that AI, and a lot of science fiction writers have

explored this, of course, is the strategic advice of an AI. Here I think of Isaac Asimov and his Foundation trilogy, Foundation and Empire, Second Foundation. It's really AI advising about the big strategic muscle movements. And again, AI is able to read, comprehend, analyze, distribute information, communicate options and recommendations at the very highest levels. The AI who sits on the shoulder of the President of the United States, for example. So, again, the short answer to the question, how much will the AI change things? Immensely. How do you see Greenland and the potential range of alliances, outcomes?

I think it's important to note this. In 1867, we almost bought Greenland. I mean this is not a crazy idea that came about in the last five years. The same time we were negotiating to buy Alaska we were very close to buying Greenland. And by the way the idea of buying territory from Denmark is not crazy. In 1913, we bought what are today the U.S. Virgin Islands. We purchased them from Denmark. So our knee-jerk reaction is, oh, that's a crazy idea. It's actually not. Historically, Denmark has traded with us in the past. And oh, by the way, Greenland is an incredible treasure trove

of strategic resources located in some of the most important military hardware and real estate in the world. So having said all that, what is crazy is the idea of invading or using military force to take it over. That makes no sense. It would immediately create massive pushback from the entire world. It would undermine all of our tenants of foreign policy. How are we going to object to Russia invading Ukraine while we're invading Greenland? So the bottom line is it's not a bad idea if we can have influence and engagement with Greenland. I think the best way to do that is diplomatically working through Denmark. And oh, by the way, the Greenlanders are on the verge of declaring independence. They may well do that. And if they do, they may be looking for strong strategic partners.

So let's follow events. Let's be economically engaged. The prime minister of Greenland said, we are not for sale, but we are open for business. That's a pretty good line. We had to take advantage of that and do all that we can to kind of pull them toward us, keep China and Russia away. But the idea of using military forces non-starter won't happen. I know you're a big believer in smart power and carrots, not military force. Indeed.

What do you see in terms of opportunities and do these include public-private partnerships? And what else? I'm going to park on that idea of public-private partnerships. I think particularly American industry is this massive, massive iceberg. And the only part that's really the governments to control is this kind of little tip of the iceberg above the ocean. So what we need is a better modus vivendi for the huge private sector to work with the public sector. That means, by the way, that the public sector has to get its act together and work together with better interagency cooperation.

Too often we find the different agencies of government pulling in different directions, not only thematically as between Department of Justice, Department of State, Department of Defense, but also levels of government. We find divisions between state, county, individual cities, the federal government. We have a lot of work to do on the public sector kind of getting it together. And the private sector by its very nature is going to be very diffuse. So if we could get government broadly speaking, working and pulling together to then go to the huge private sector and try and harness some of that for all the things we've talked about from technological advances to our medical situation in terms of pandemic preparation to foreign policy

to the environment. That's I think something that gives me a great deal of hope. Before I ask for the three takeaways you'd like to leave the audience with today, is there anything else you'd like to mention? What should I have asked you that I did not? I'd ask everybody who's listening to this, wherever you are on the political spectrum, be respectful of each other. Let's try to have our disagreements about policy, and we should,

and there are certainly a lot of ways to approach any of the big issues But let's figure that out if we do that the future is so bright for this country Let's try and find some middle ground That's so important What are the three takeaways you would like to leave the audience with today? First the system of alliances that the United States has built. Today, NATO is 32 nations and they represent 55% of the world's gross domestic product. That network of alliances I think bodes well for the

United States. Secondly, the nation of India, the world's most populous country because it's a democracy. They have a charismatic leader who has his ups and downs like all leaders do, but is a preeminent figure in the global south who can help shape that vast part of the country. Brazil, Nigeria, South Africa, India itself, Pakistan, Indonesia. India could be a fundamental leader in that. And number three, I feel that this century ultimately is not going to be about the rise of China, not going to be about the rise of India, not going to be about the rise of India, not going to be about amazing new technology. Barbara Tuckman, who writes about the 21st century will see this as the century of the rise of women, where women are finally going to absolutely absorb 50% of the workplace. They're going to bring all of that sensibility and intelligence.

It's coming. You see more and more women coming to important jobs. That is going to be an enormous plus. We need the most talented people everywhere to help. Hundred percent. Admiral, thank you for your service in the military and thank you for joining Three Takeaways today. This has been a pleasure and I very much look forward to your 2084 book in the fall. Sounds great, Lynn.

Thank you very much and thank you again for your service as a professor at Columbia University. If you're enjoying the podcast, and I really hope you are, please review us on Apple Podcasts or Spotify or wherever you get your podcasts. It really helps get the word out. If you're interested, you can also sign up for the Three Takeaways newsletter at ThreeTakeaways.com, where you can also listen to previous episodes. You can also follow us on LinkedIn, X, Instagram, and Facebook. I'm Lynne Toman and this is 3 Takeaways. Thanks for listening.