Ed Arnold, a Senior Research Fellow for European Security at RUSI, explores the critical shift in Europe's defense landscape as reliance on U.S. support diminishes. He discusses the implications of U.S. military withdrawal and the urgent necessity for European nations to enhance their defense capabilities. The conversation touches on the need for increased spending and collaborative leadership within NATO to address emerging threats. Arnold also highlights challenges in defense standardization and the potential impact of changing U.S. foreign policy on European security.

If the relationship between a government, the military, and industry is to really change from a transactional one towards a sincere partnership it must be underpinned by a new era of honesty and clarity. Simon Kings, Exec BD Director of Raytheon UK, talks about what has changed for industry since 2022, and what the threat picture looks like for the DIB. The discussion covers procurement and acquisition, processes and modernisation, challenges to delivery, and what the reality of ‘sovereignty’ as a political ambition statement looks like. Foundational to all of this is Simon’s description of the way industry (and shareholders) make investment decisions: yet another set of political speeches and promises, policies and transformations, doesn’t cut it. Clarity about which bits of national security are not going to be funded are as important as the revelations of what is to be renewed. That honesty and clarity seems to have been missing for several decades. Will this be the moment it changes?

James Heappey, former UK Minister of the Armed Forces and military veteran, delves into the complex politics behind national security strategies. He discusses the balancing act of securing defense funding while addressing public perceptions. The conversation highlights the varying understandings of national security among politicians and the public's focus on local issues. Heappey also emphasizes the crucial role of personnel in the military versus technological advancements, and the pressing need for increased defense investment amid global geopolitical challenges.

The continual changes to British defence acquisition and procurement processes, frameworks, doctrines, strategies and plans have wreaked havoc with the military equipment plan for decades. Various – and sometimes radical – reforms have been tried to evolve a system that is ubiquitously criticised from everyone inside (and outside) the national security community. No one is happy, yet most people actually involved in it are trying very hard to make it work. This is not a uniquely British problem however: There is nowhere in the world that people are content with their procurement system - each one could be faster, buy better kit, deliver imporved value-for-money and quality, pleasing taxpayers as well as the people who use the kit. Given that the on-going UK SDR must try and come up with some recommendations to make it ‘better’ (hopefully in a different way than every other one has promised to do since 1997), what are the opportunities and risks this time around? Dr Andrew Curtis helps us think thus through with some sage advice: how about starting by implementing all the bits of some previous attempts at reform?

Tom Karako, a global missile defense expert from CSIS, shares his insights on the UK’s missile defense inadequacies amidst growing threats. He discusses the evolving landscape of missile capabilities stemming from recent global conflicts and the necessity for stronger defense infrastructures. Tom highlights the challenges faced by European militaries in modernizing legacy systems, and he dives into the potential of non-kinetic technologies like lasers. His pragmatism offers a roadmap for future defense strategies and success metrics for upcoming UK capabilities.

Inigo,:""'""""""""""""""""""""""""''""""""""""""""''""""""""''""""''"''""""!`""!`""""!`""!`""!`""!`""!""!"!""!"!"

In this engaging conversation, Maria de Goeij Reid, a Senior Research Fellow at Oxford University, dives into the complexities of national security. She argues for the importance of strategic empathy in understanding adversaries and emphasizes a shift from 'convenient threats' to 'inconvenient threats' like pandemics. Maria highlights the necessity of nuanced behavioral analysis in understanding adversarial intentions and calls for enhanced societal resilience and interdisciplinary approaches to better prepare for unpredictable global challenges.

Professor Tony King, an expert on contemporary military threats and author of 'Command' and 'Urban Warfare', explores the evolving landscape of warfare. He discusses the implications of a potential Trump presidency and highlights the rise of state-sponsored proxies. Key topics include the challenges posed by new weapons, the intricacies of decision-making, and the crucial role of AI. Tony emphasizes skepticism regarding AI's promised efficiencies, advocating for human oversight and innovative military strategies to adapt to fast-changing threats.

Paul Cornish, a Professor of Strategic Studies at the University of Exeter, dives into the complexities of contemporary warfare and the shortcomings of the UK's national security strategies. He criticizes the oversimplified narratives surrounding modern threats, emphasizing the need for genuine strategic thinking. The conversation highlights evolving issues like cybercrime and climate change, alongside a caution against over-reliance on technology in military contexts. Cornish also draws parallels between today's challenges and pre-Cold War dynamics, advocating for a comprehensive understanding of defense.

This mini series about NATO has taken some people out of their comfort zone: nonetheless, there has been a lot of positive feedback about the honesty of these conversation about the Alliance. In the final episode of this series, Peter talks again to Professor Julian Lindley French about NATO’s friends and enemies and tackle some questions from listeners. In the end, they address the thorny question of a second Trump presidency and what that could mean for the Alliance.   The series has been is co-sponsored by NATO Public Diplomacy Division. It’s reassuring to know that the Alliance has the self-confidence to foster an honest and open debate about NATO. That’s not something you would find from lesser organisations. Chapeau!