Tech Fit 4 podcast Episode 11 Guest: Wolfgang Ischinger

Tech Fit 4 Europe (podcast series) -- Episode 11 -- Geopolitics of Tech: Time for Trust & Transatlantic Ties?

Casper Klynge [host] Wolfgang Ischinger [guest] Chairman - Munich Security Conference Wolfgang Ischinger (@ischinger) / Twitter

Running time: 55:45

[MUSIC]

CASPER KLYNGE: Hello, and welcome to Tech Fit 4 Europe and your podcast serious looking at the big policy questions behind today’s technologies and the people who shape them. My name is Casper Klynge, I’m the vice president for European government affairs at Microsoft. Together with my team, I’ll be bringing you some of the most influential voices on pressing policy issues. Thanks for joining and enjoy the episode.

Well, once again, welcome to the Tech Fit 4 Europe podcast. It’s going to be, I think, a very interesting discussion today because I’m honored to have with me Ambassador Wolfgang Ischinger, a long-term diplomat who served in Washington, D.C., and London. And also, a person I’ve actually had an encounter within a previous life because I was serving in for the European Union, heading the planning mission for the Rule of Law mission when Ambassador Ischinger was representing the troika and the status negotiations for Kosovo. We do have a dark past together.

But we’re going to have a discussion about foreign policy, about geopolitics, about the role of technology and digitalization in today’s world. First of all, Ambassador Ischinger – Wolfgang – great to have you on the pod and thanks very much for doing this.

WOLFGANG ISCHINGER: Pleasure to be with you, Casper. Real pleasure.

CASPER KLYNGE: Fantastic. Just to come clean from the beginning, we of course at Microsoft are a close partner of the Munich Security Conference and are really happy to support the work that you’re doing there.

I thought I would begin by being totally inappropriate. Of course, being Danish, Wolfgang, you know that there is no filter between what we think and what comes out. I thought I would say you’re an old hand, and apologies for perhaps making that statement in the beginning. You’ve been in diplomacy for decades. You’ve been following international relations. How has that changed in the last 10, 15, 20 years? Of course, I’m alluding to the role that technology is playing in today’s world. Why don’t we begin there?

WOLFGANG ISCHINGER: That’s a great question, Casper, and quite frankly, let me start by pointing to a fundamental change that I’ve seen over the years with the organization I’m now responsible for – the Munich Security Conference.

1

Tech Fit 4 Europe podcast Episode 11 Guest: Wolfgang Ischinger

When I first attended this annual event in Munich as a simple participant way back in the 1990s when I was political director in the German Foreign Ministry, the people who came together there were generals, senior diplomats, foreign ministers, defense ministers, and some academic advisors at NGO representatives. There was no tech industry present. We thought or they thought that the business of international crisis management, the business of managing global affairs was essentially something for diplomats and the military to handle.

Today, fast forward, enormous change. In today’s world, when I define international security, I cannot define this term without including in a very, very comprehensive manner all sorts of elements of technology. We cannot discuss cybersecurity, for example, among generals and diplomats because we’re simply, quite frankly, not competent in that. So, we need the tech folks. We need even let me put it this way: We need the next generation because these people are usually more competent than my generation. That is a very simple example of how dramatic the change has been over the years.

I have found that going forward, for the Munich Security Conference, issues like tech, innovation, to the extent that they will influence defense and international cooperation, international institutions, etc., will be just as important as, for example, questions of global energy security, global climate security, global health security. That’s the one we learned over the last year.

CASPER KLYNGE: Absolutely.

WOLFGANG ISCHINGER: This is a non-military area of international security that 20 years ago no one was actually ready to talk about that in Munich. So, enormous change, and the tech change is the single most important one because it has, of course, also changed the way diplomats do their business.

When I was a young diplomat, we would type a report and that would then be encrypted in a very complicated manner by some specialists and sent home. Today, my younger colleagues in the German Foreign Ministry and Danish Foreign Ministry and State Department, they communicate with each other of course via e-mail and other options all day long. It’s a far more comprehensive communications environment in which we live. That has substantially and dramatically changed the way diplomacy is actually conducted today as a business.

CASPER KLYNGE: Of course, this is sweet music in my ears. It will come as no surprise. Of course, also, when I look at the job previously being an ambassador to the tech industry, I couldn’t agree more with your points. As a long-term observer and a practitioner in diplomacy, do you think that the reckoning that you have today, Wolfgang, is that shared by diplomats more widely or do we still have a catch-up need for diplomacy to evolve into a 21st century where technology and digitalization has not only changed the pace of diplomacy, but in fact, also changed the nature of diplomacy?

WOLFGANG ISCHINGER: Absolutely. Of course, we are in a catching-up kind of phase. Let me try to make a very fundamental point. When I went to law school, essentially half a century ago, I’m sorry to say, the idea presented to us students at the time was that the state – that governments – actually have a monopoly concerning the ability to inflict major damage. Speaking of kinetic energy, if somebody violates your borders, you send in the tanks or the airplanes and you fire at them and that is only being done under the auspices or directly executed by government forces.

2

Tech Fit 4 Europe podcast Episode 11 Guest: Wolfgang Ischinger

Today, the capacity to inflict damage as we have just seen recently with the Colonial Pipeline and so many other examples and solar winds in the United States, the capacity to inflict damage is no longer a monopoly of governments. The entire international system, the relationship, the power balance has changed in a fundamental way. Non-government actors, as we call them, all of a sudden assume roles and responsibilities or irresponsibilities, I should say, that were unknown to us in the world of diplomacy.

We’re all scratching our heads and trying to figure out, is the system which our grandfathers erected in New York, the U.N., built on the ashes of World War Two, where nation-states are the only ones admitted as members, is that still the right kind of configuration? Or should certain non-state actors, whether they are large companies – many companies like the one you’re representing, have of course a much larger budget than many governments and are far more powerful than many of the small governments around.

What about large NGOs like Human Rights Watch, Amnesty, or so? Or foundations like the Gates Foundation, which have done more for global health than the entire WHO was able to do for decades.

The tech revolution, in my view as an at least former practicing diplomat, has brought about change which we diplomats find very hard to put our arms around. It’s a huge challenge and it’s only beginning.

CASPER KLYNGE: I’d be curious to ask you how you see that evolve also in the framework of the Munich Security Conference. I think what you’re pointing out here, Wolfgang, is such a fundamental aspect of the world we live in.

Unfortunately, when we look back at the last 14 months with COVID-19, we have had a pause on normal life, but unfortunately, the cyber-attacks have not paused our activities. In fact, we’ve seen, as you mentioned, a number of high-profile attacks. We’ve seen even healthcare services being attacked by particularly unethical aggressors. How has that set itself through in the Munich Security Conference? Do you see the cybersecurity threat being discussed in the same way as you would if green men crosses a border, and thereby in a very fundamental way, breaks the sovereignty of nations? Do you think that has evolved into a mainstream discussion today?

WOLFGANG ISCHINGER: Increasingly so, yes. We are here on a rapidly evolving trajectory, where four or five years ago, when I put a cybersecurity item on our agenda in Munich, I was worried that people would go and have coffee when somebody would climb up and speak from the restroom with using terms which most generals or most parliamentarians, at least at that time, were not yet sufficiently familiar with.

But the opposite happened. We found that these first cyber events which we organized attracted enormous attention. People were not stupid. They understood that this is actually a future coming challenge which will grow in terms of importance for our lives, for our work in terms of new threats.

Yesterday, in a different setting, somebody said in a meeting I attended cyber can be a tool, a useful tool for mankind, not only for communication purposes, it can also be a weapon. Dealing with that, that’s our challenge. I think that for the Munich Security Conference, the tech challenge – especially looking at it to the extent that it is being used as a weapon in the cases that you just referred to, inflicting enormous damage to businesses, governments, institutions, infrastructure – that is going to be a standard feature. It will have to be a standard feature in the events that we organize. In order to make sure that we have sufficient competence to understand

3

Tech Fit 4 Europe podcast Episode 11 Guest: Wolfgang Ischinger what is going to happen over the horizon, what are the kinds of issues we should discuss in 2022 even if we don’t really understand them right now?

We’ve just created a Munich Security Conference Innovation and Technology Board with a number of very senior people, a very diverse group of people. Some courageous investors who are investing in businesses in the tech sector, some military leaders, a former head of NATO from the , some tech experts from the business community representing companies like your own.

I hope and I’m very confident that this group will make a difference and will enable us to put on the agenda the kind of stuff that CEOs and political leaders will want to be aware of before they actually hit the ground. That’s the challenge. Talking about what happened two or three years ago in Ukraine is okay, but we need to talk about the stuff that might happen to us next year.

CASPER KLYNGE: Exactly.

WOLFGANG ISCHINGER: And who will potentially do it to us or to our companies or to our societies in terms of disinformation, in terms of ransomware, in terms of actually hitting infrastructure like in these recent cases?

This is going to be a standard feature for us. I’m happy to say that we didn’t start yesterday. We’ve been enjoying a very useful cooperative relationship with companies like yours from the tech sector.

We’ve organized specialized events in Silicon Valley a couple of years ago, in Tel Aviv, which was really interesting with all these small Israeli experts and companies, many of whom have grown up from the Israeli intelligence community – a fantastic atmosphere there of enormous affinity with new developments. And we will continue that. In fact, we are currently looking at – pandemic permitting – at the possibility of organizing yet another Silicon Valley event in cooperation with companies like yours later this year at some point in the fall.

CASPER KLYNGE: By the way, I think the point you made before from yesterday about somebody making a remark on cyber being both a tool and a weapon sound very familiar. I’m just wondering, it could have been my boss who mentioned that yesterday, but you don’t have to reveal your sources on this one.

WOLFGANG ISCHINGER: I think it was him, absolutely. (Laughter.)

CASPER KLYNGE: Wolfgang, can I ask you for a favor? Because one thing that I’m struggling with always is when I sit down with friends or with family and try and explain what it is that we’re trying to do, including in my current job, sort of creating a dialogue between governments and the private sector, so “multi-stakeholderism” or multilateralism, what does that mean? Does it matter at all?

And I’m just wondering, if you were sitting in those conversations, what would you say to my friends and my families? Perhaps if you could explain also the role you see of the Munich Security Conference, can that be a peacemaker or dialogue facilitator at a time where the world might not be in traditional conflict, but where there is a lot of conflict, including the cyber domain that you mentioned before?

WOLFGANG ISCHINGER: Casper, I see essentially two main questions or challenges: One is we’ve done a recent polling effort. We’ve polled the Europeans and the result is really quite worrisome. It reveals mistrust, their own

4

Tech Fit 4 Europe podcast Episode 11 Guest: Wolfgang Ischinger companies and governments, but they trust the United States government and U.S. companies even less than they trust their own. The worrisome element is that their mistrust regarding America is almost as significant as their mistrust of China.

I’m exaggerating a little bit, but they’re throwing America and China in one basket, so to speak. That is, of course, really worrisome. In other words, we have a trust issue – a trust problem. And as I keep saying as a diplomat, trust is the currency of diplomacy. In the absence of trust, you’re not going to get any agreement signed or any treaty ratified. It is an essential precondition for the kind of trans-Atlantic cooperation which we need in order to grapple – to handle these challenges.

That brings me to my second point: As a former law student, I look at this world as a world where, in the classic realm of arms, we have 100 years ago the Geneva Conventions, we have arms control arrangements, most of which have gone south in recent years, unfortunately, and we have international institutions like the U.N. and NATO and the European Union and the International Court of Justice, etc.

In the cyber – in the digital arena that we’re talking about, this world looks to me more like anarchy than a well- regulated atmosphere. Can we get our act together – we, democracies, the west, the United States, and European allies and of course also Asian allies, who are organized as democracies – can we get our act together and try to at least start working on getting rid of anarchy?

I think it was, again, a senior Microsoft leader – I think it was Brad Smith, himself – who came up in Munich a few years ago with the suggestion of why not think in terms of a cyber Geneva Convention – a digital Geneva Convention – that would, for example, set and establish rules that would bind countries not to allow attacks on infrastructure – on hospitals, etc.?

I think this is, of course, today, it sounds like a dream. It’s a vision. It’s probably very difficult to go from here to there, but I think it is worth trying. To those who will say, “Well, this will never work because it’s so hard to detect who did what to whom, etc.,” my answer would be, Well, when nuclear weapons were first developed half a century ago, it took a long time. It took many years until those who had nuclear weapons, in this case especially the United States and the former Soviet Union found a way to talk to each other about rules that would make it less likely that they would eliminate each other.

After a while, that worked. Just recently, President Biden and Vladimir Putin extended the life the new START agreement. That was a vision decades ago. It was possible to implement that. I tend to be an optimist by nature. I think it’s worth trying to work in that direction to look for a cyber world that is based on some essential rules that will help protect our citizens, our life from disinformation from huge damage.

You know better than I, the numbers that have been put together in terms of what is the loss of the global business community – the losses suffered through hacking, through these types of cyber-attacks? It’s mind boggling, some that I’ve seen.

CASPER KLYNGE: It really is. I think one of the unfortunate aspects of it is that it sometimes requires a severe situation before everybody realizes that we need to invest more in this area. I think that applies for governments; I think it applies for the private sector. I think academia, think tanks, Munich Security Conference play an incredibly important role in getting the political attention required.

5

Tech Fit 4 Europe podcast Episode 11 Guest: Wolfgang Ischinger

I do also just want to acknowledge, and I think what you spoke about in terms of a digital Geneva Convention, or more broadly, the norms discussion in cybersecurity, how do you regulate irresponsible behavior, whether from state-sponsored actors or non-state-sponsored actors is, unfortunately, one of the key points of our time.

I wanted to go back, Wolfgang, to the survey – the incredibly interesting but also slightly depressing survey that you guys did. I think there were some interesting numbers. You spoke about the lack of trust, and this is one area where our motto is: Technology runs on trust. I think it’s not only vis-à-vis consumers, it’s also vis-à-vis governments, vis-à-vis societies. I do think you’re right in pointing out democracy is going to be one of the key topics where the technology industry will also have to come behind democracy and support basic fundamental aspects.

If I take the survey, you mentioned lack of trust in technology companies, but even more, lack of trust in companies from another country than your own. I want to come back to the trans-Atlantic relationship in a second. What does this mean for the European Union project? If you trust companies from your own country more than you do your next-door neighbor, is that an indication also that the European project is going to be challenged also because of the trust in technology?

WOLFGANG ISCHINGER: Well, I think to a certain extent, yes. There is a little bit of nationalism here. National identity is still sort of reassuring to most. The Germans trust the German system or the German government a little more than they would trust the French or the Spanish, etc. I don’t think that this challenge to the European process, to the European project is – I think that is – let me put it this way: I think we’re going to be able to handle that.

What I think is needed, though, is that we think about how to extend the various initiatives that have been created over the last couple of years. For example, there was this call at the Paris Peace Forum. There is the so-called “Charter of Trust,” which is an initiative that was created at our conference in Munich under the leadership of the CEO of Siemens and a number of other companies.

Now, I think that these types of initiatives, they’re all good, but they should try to be extended to include cooperation between the public and private sector. We need a charter of trust that would bind the U.S. government and the EU Commission and the various member governments together with the industry leaders, with the big and small tech companies.

Extending this trust-building effort – a company-based effort to a public-private partnership I think is one good idea. It’s probably not the only one, but that is what I would hope that we can work toward as we take the Munich Security Conference forward.

I’m really quite excited about this technology board, because we just had a first session – an initial session two or three weeks ago. So many really interesting ideas came up, which we’re now going to try to follow up and examine to what extent we could put such ideas on the agenda in Munich and really have a discussion and invite contributions that would point us in the right direction of government and private-sector cooperation, especially in the trans-Atlantic community.

6

Tech Fit 4 Europe podcast Episode 11 Guest: Wolfgang Ischinger

You know, quite frankly, we’ve had four tough years for the trans-Atlantic community. Everybody knows that. Now, in other words, if we don’t use the opportunity that the advent of the Biden administration signals, namely, a return to the commitment to work with allies and partners, that’s what President Biden has said early on, and of course we on the European side are totally happy to hear this message from Washington. If we don’t use this opportunity right now, we will miss an historic opportunity.

I think that this is not something where we should wait until this overworked Biden administration with many jobs not even filled in Washington at this moment, we should not wait for them to come to us. We should actually take interesting suggestions to them and engage with the Biden administration.

This is, by the way, one reason why I’m currently with my team exploring the possibility of organizing a small but very high-level event in Washington, D.C., for the end of this summer. Again, pandemic permitting. That’s currently the overriding theme, but we need more – we need to return to more trans-Atlantic interchange, trans- Atlantic discourse, and trans-Atlantic trust. Voila! That’s it.

CASPER KLYNGE: And, you know, I’m a fellow trans-Atlanticist, and I think everything what you’ve said and done in your career also indicates that that is a relationship you find incredibly important, and perhaps more so now than ever before also because of the four years of challenges we’ve had.

I would say that not only the survey that you did at the Munich Security Conference, but also similar survey that the European Council on Foreign Relations did, sort of indicate that despite the enthusiasm of the Biden administration, there has been some damage done. There was a little bit of skepticism. Europe is waiting. What will the Biden administration actually do?

I think we need to do everything we can. When I studied international relations at university, it was all about government-to-government or multilateralism. But perhaps if I may ask, Wolfgang, can the private sector play a role in fostering and forging the trans-Atlantic relationship? And, of course, it’s a little bit of a loaded question, because I think we should and do and need to.

WOLFGANG ISCHINGER: Absolutely. Absolutely. Let me tell you a little anecdote, Casper.

CASPER KLYNGE: Please.

WOLFGANG ISCHINGER: When I served as the German ambassador in Washington, D.C., during what we now call the “Iraq crisis” – 2002 to 2003, remember when the United States with a few allies intervened militarily in Iraq. and France, for example, were among those who thought that it was a really bad idea and we had, therefore, kind of a crisis.

We had a crisis that, bilaterally, was really quite serious. Chancellor Schroeder at the time and President Bush – George W. Bush, didn’t talk to each other for months because they were mad at each other because of this disagreement.

As an ambassador in Washington, I was really worried about this lack of communication. So, what did we do? One of my associates at the embassy in Washington said, “Have we lost the understanding that the backbone of our relationship is actually not the chancellor and the president, but it’s the German investment in the United

7

Tech Fit 4 Europe podcast Episode 11 Guest: Wolfgang Ischinger

States and American investment in Europe and 800,000 Americans employed by German companies and 900,000 or so Germans employed by Opal and IBM, et cetera, et cetera, all over Germany.

We organized in this difficult year of 2003 in Washington a German-American Business Summit. And what do you know, they all came. The leaders of General Motors, Ford, Volkswagen, Mercedes, Siemens, and Allianz, et cetera, they all came, and we were able to use this event to point out that there is more to our bilateral relationship than just this Iraq disagreement – that we’re actually doing stuff with each other that most people, of course, do not notice every day. Our companies work together, they employ people in the other country. We have research institutions by companies in the other country. We support university projects, et cetera. That’s the real backbone.

This is why on the basis of my own personal experience; this is why I think the private sector has a potentially huge role to play in making sure that the trans-Atlantic community uses this opportunity to get our act together. Don’t leave it to parliamentarians and to governments. I think everybody will be happy to see companies actually make proposals and offer opportunities and engage, engage, engage. When I tried to bridge during the Trump years when many of my fellow Germans were frustrated with the White House – the Trump White House – I tried to say, “Look, America is more than the White House. There are 50 governors, there are 100 senators, there are 400-plus members of Congress. There are huge numbers of German companies employing people all over the U.S.” And, of course, there is an NGO community also, a civil society. So, let’s use those. Let’s engage with those on environmental protection, on climate protection. We can work very well even if we can’t work with the Trump White House, we can work with the government of California, for example, or on other issues with others.

So, let’s not lose sight of the multifaceted relationship that this is, and the business community plays a hugely important role. I’m very much in favor of seeing a strong engagement by the business community – especially because the business community in the area that we’re talking about – high tech – is the only element that’s really competent. We are the beneficiaries, we in the political realm, of the competence of the business community. They can play a major role in pointing us in the right direction. What needs to be done? What about tariffs and trade?

On both sides of the Atlantic, there is currently a lot of hesitation about returning to a kind of a (inaudible) discussion and I understand the political reasons why this is difficult, but I think companies can help create the atmosphere to at least look at certain areas where lowering tariffs, creating a more level playing field, et cetera, would be a win-win situation for both sides of the Atlantic.

CASPER KLYNGE: And, Wolfgang, if I might just add, if we stay in sort of the domain of traditional diplomacy or government-to-government affairs, I very much agree with your point about sort of variable geometry, that you have different relations that are actually stronger no matter who is sitting in the White House or who might be sitting in Brussels if we just put it like that. But do you think we actually need to reconceptualize also how we think about alliances and coalitions? I mean, today it has to be multi-stakeholders not only by governments, it’s also about the private sector for two reasons: Because of the influence that companies like Microsoft have, but also to increase the accessibility and societal responsibility of companies like Microsoft and many others. It’s a two-way street where we contribute in this case to the trans-Atlantic relationship or the values – democracy, human rights, et cetera, but at the same time it’s also a way of governments holding companies like ours to account.

8

Tech Fit 4 Europe podcast Episode 11 Guest: Wolfgang Ischinger

WOLFGANG ISCHINGER: I absolutely agree with what you’re saying, Casper. Let me point out that the EU side, as long ago as last November or so, after the elections in the United States, came up with a number of suggestions for the trans-Atlantic relationship. One of these suggestions was the reanimation, the revitalization of the trans- Atlantic Tech and Trade Council.

CASPER KLYNGE: Exactly.

WOLFGANG ISCHINGER: Which is an institutional arrangement which includes, of course, the government institutions of both sides, but also includes the business interests. I think if we take these – such a formula, not just as a scapegoat, we have a council for this area, so everything is fine. Of course, it’s only going to be fine if it’s actually going to be used and taken seriously. But if we take it seriously, then these types of arrangements can take us a long way in the right direction.

If I may, let me offer another example. At the moment, everybody in international diplomacy speaks about China – China, China, China. And we know and I’m sure you would not disagree with me that, of course, it’s important that Europe and the United States try to coordinate on China. We have, in many areas, very similar if not identical interests – having a level playing field, preventing cyber espionage, trading practices, et cetera, et cetera. But our interests are not identical in other areas. The United States has military commitments in the far east, we in Europe don’t. There are also areas of difference, which means that there is a need for the trans-Atlantic partners to coordinate in a major way on China.

This is going to be an almost historic challenge, because China is going to be much more relevant for us than was the case with the Soviet Union during the cold war. China will be a competitor or systemic rival and a cooperative partner that we are now saying on both sides of the Atlantic in so many respects – in practically all respects of our societies.

I think this is one area where the Biden administration and the leadership in Europe should actually think about an institutional arrangement – a novel arrangement.

I’ve participated in a study – in a taskforce study last year before the Biden election organized by the German Marshall Fund in Washington, D.C. We came up with a suggestion, which I think is a practical one. We said, this is so important, this China challenge, that there should be a trans-Atlantic commission set up, headed by somebody like the vice president of the United States on the U.S. side, sort of above and beyond the normal cabinet departments and it should maybe be headed on the European side by the president of the EU Commission or someone with that kind of authority in order to make sure that we take it seriously and we consider it not a specialized, you know, coordinating body that deals with little details, but deals with the strategic nature of this challenge to trans-Atlantic values, to trans-Atlantic business, to trans-Atlantic common policy interests, whether it’s in arms control or in regional peace and stability in the far east and beyond.

There are a huge number of new challenges for the trans-Atlantic world, and I hope – I’m hopeful that this year will be a year where such initiatives can be tackled and started and put into practice. Again, let me repeat, this is an opportunity that will not repeat itself too often – this first year of the Biden administration.

CASPER KLYNGE: I completely agree. And I think this is such an important point that you’re making, Wolfgang, that it’s really all hands on deck to try and revitalize the trans-Atlantic relationship. I think that’s important both

9

Tech Fit 4 Europe podcast Episode 11 Guest: Wolfgang Ischinger for the U.S. and for Europe. It’s also important in how we tackle some of the geopolitical challenges that might be coming our way over the next couple of years.

Now, we’ve spoken about the world and big issues. Let’s zoom in a little bit toward the area where you’re sitting and the country you represent because, of course, some of us can’t imagine a world without, you know, Europe’s (inaudible) we have a relation here in Germany and I think everybody around is following very closely what will be the outcome and what will be the consequences of the outcome of the election of a new chancellor of Germany.

I have two super-easy questions for you, Wolfgang. Who will be the new chancellor and what will be the consequences for Europe?

WOLFGANG ISCHINGER: I can’t really answer the first part, but what I can say is this: This is actually a positive message. You know, when you look at our neighboring country, France, they have elections next year in 2022. It is not, again, I’m an optimist, but it is not entirely impossible for the analysts who worry about France to think that it would be possible for Emmanuel Macron to lose his reelection and for Marine Le Pen from the right – the far right – to win the presidency of France. That would be a major disruptive event not only for France, but for the EU and for the world. I mean, they are a permanent member of the U.N. Security Council, et cetera, et cetera.

Now, back to Germany. The good news about our elections in September is that even if it is true that Chancellor Merkel has decided not to run again, it is almost certain – I mean, I would almost be willing to be money on it, that Germany will not live through a major disruption. I think it is pretty clear, regardless of which political party comes out on top, whether it’s the classic CDU, I mean, Angela Merkel’s party or whether it’s the Greens, who have had a meteoric rise over the last period, and whatever coalition is going to be created, it seems – it appears very clear to me that whatever coalition is going to come out of this is going to remain pro-EU and is going to remain essentially pro-NATO.

I mean, there are always issues. There are issues about – a question of nuclear weapons, but these issues about nuclear weapons and NATO, et cetera, these questions have been around for a long time. They’re not new questions.

I’m happy to say that our neighbors and partners, I know they’re looking at this with great interest and anticipation, but I think they don’t need to be found fearful of the outcome of the German election. We will have quite a bit of continuity – at least as far as foreign policy is concerned.

In a different area, thinking the conversation back to tech and the digital world, I will actually hope that we will have some degree of disruption, because my own country – you know the situation in Germany, Casper. We are lagging behind in terms of digitalization. We have not yet mastered the art of transforming our public institutions, our bureaucracy, into a paper-free organization. Others have done this, some of our smaller partners, and I admire their successful trajectory. We are lagging behind.

So, I think in the digital arena and in some other areas, I would hope that this next – this election would allow for a disruptive jump forward into the digital future, where Germany has all the – very smart businesses, the German Mittelstand, they’re actually pretty good, but the German bureaucracy, the government institutions have not kept pace, really, with the digital revolution. That’s where we need to close the gap and move forward. That’s a

10

Tech Fit 4 Europe podcast Episode 11 Guest: Wolfgang Ischinger big opportunity, and I’m very interested to see that in this beginning election campaign in Germany, this is attracting – these questions are attracting more and more attention. That’s good.

CASPER KLYNGE: First of all, I think it’s such an important point you’re making about us not being too worried about the outcome of the German elections. We will still have a pro-EU, pro-NATO, we will have stability in Germany, regardless of what the outcome is. On the other hand, I think the evolution of the Green Party, if you like, in Germany is also an indication that, first of all, the Green Party in Germany is perhaps not like Green parties in other parts of Europe. There are traditional values in that party as well.

But also, the role that sustainability is not having in German political life. And I think that mirrors very well what the European Commission is focusing on, the transition of digitalization and sustainability, of course, headed by the German president of the European Commission. We can say very little good about COVID-19 and the last year of so challenging times, but is this actually an opportunity for Germany to put the turbo on the digitalization? I know you’re also optimistic, Wolfgang, that you will see Germany turning more digital in the next couple of years compared to what we’ve seen in the past.

WOLFGANG ISCHINGER: Absolutely, we must. There is no alternative. It’s great to see that the country, almost all the significant political parties have now organized themselves in a way that they are behind this climate change push – I mean, fighting climate change to put it more bluntly and to understand that if we do this right, this is actually not only a burden, but an opportunity for innovation for German companies to become leaders in these new technologies, including after so many years of hesitation for our major automobile industry. They have been – they were not the first to produce a non, you know, traditional automobile engine, but they’re now not only catching up fast, but they’re introducing all sorts of innovation.

When I look at my morning newspapers, they’re full about the hydrogen economy that we’re going to be creating and other future technologies. So, the country is not technology averse. I think the country is open to this and all the next leadership in Germany needs to do is use this energy that’s palpable in the society to move us forward. So, I think Germany can and should, of course, be among those who lead with our economic power in the EU that we should try to really demonstrate something with leadership, taking the European Union to where it should be, namely, not only being a regulatory superpower, which we are already in many respects.

CASPER KLYNGE: Yes.

WOLFGANG ISCHINGER: But also, as an initiative superpower. That should be the goal.

CASPER KLYNGE: And in many ways, it’s a paradox because you have some of the biggest, strongest, most technology-driven companies in Germany. You mentioned Siemens, I would add SAP to the list and there are a whole range of small- and medium-sized enterprises that are very innovative and very much out there. I agree with you on that.

We’re coming toward the end. Of course, I was trying to think about the most difficult and challenging question I could ask you, Wolfgang, toward the end to sort of invite my audience. And, you know, we have a common friend in Ian Bremmer. I know you had a discussion with Ian just yesterday. You did a tweet a few days ago of an ice hockey match in Moscow, where a certain President Putin scored eight goals during that match. And, of course,

11

Tech Fit 4 Europe podcast Episode 11 Guest: Wolfgang Ischinger that says a couple of things – not only that he’s a fantastic ice hockey player, and I used to play a little bit, so I was watching that clip with interest. It perhaps, also, says a little bit about the sort of governance form in Russia.

Being German, Munich Security Conference, one area where Germany, foreign policy-wise, have had a slightly different approach than other European countries has, of course, been in the relationships with Russia.

My question would be: How do you see that evolve? Will Germany continue to play sort of a facilitating dialogue role vis a vis a Russia that is a partner in ma New York areas and also an adversary in other ways? How do you see that evolve?

WOLFGANG ISCHINGER: Well, look, Casper, it is, of course, true that the German mindset is – regarding Russia – is special, it’s unique.

CASPER KLYNGE: Yes.

WOLFGANG ISCHINGER: It is tied to the issue of guilt, looking at the horrors of World War Two. It is tied to a sense which still exists among certainly the older generation in Germany of a sense of gratefulness, gratitude, that the former Soviet Union actually allowed German reunification to happen in 1990 without a single shot being fired.

CASPER KLYNGE: Yes.

WOLFGANG ISCHINGER: And now a reunited country, I mean, what a dream that was for me as a young man. I thought it would never happen in my lifetime.

So, there is this underlying current which President von Weizsäcker, who was our head of state at the time of unification, and he expressed this actually on the day of unification, that was the 3rd of October 1990, standing at ’s Brandenburg Gate. He said, and I quote from a memory, he said, “Now that the dividing wall here in Berlin through Germany and through Western Europe is gone, we need to make sure that this wall will not be re- erected 1,000 kilometers to the east,” speaking of the western border of the former Soviet Union.

That philosophy approach is, I think, still something which we should not forget, and we should remain open to Russia if and when Russia wishes to engage with Western Europe again.

Having said that, we all know that Russia at this moment is not interested in engaging in the kind of cooperative fashion, having done what they did in Georgia, Crimea, and in eastern Ukraine and in Syria and elsewhere. Not to speak of hacking incidents and all the other unfortunate and unacceptable aspects of their recent behavior.

I actually believe that the German government has been – has played a meaningful role in how to deal with the last numbers of years of President Putin’s behavior. Germany was actually a leading proponent of the sanctions policy against Russia, which the European Union has now – surprise, surprise – been able to maintain since 2014. Many doomsayers were saying to me over the years, “Well, next year either Italy, Hungary, or somebody else will cast a veto when it comes to the extension of the sanctions decision.” It hasn’t happened. The European Union, interestingly enough, has been able to remain together in this course on Russia policy.

12

Tech Fit 4 Europe podcast Episode 11 Guest: Wolfgang Ischinger

I think there is exactly one area where there is serious disagreement, even within Germany, and that’s the pipeline project.

CASPER KLYNGE: Nord Stream 2.

WOLFGANG ISCHINGER: Which, quite frankly, I think that the likelihood is very strong that whatever new government will emerge after the September elections in Germany, the next government is not likely to continue to endorse this project.

For example, the German Greens have proposed to terminate it right now. Others have spoken of a moratorium, et cetera. In other words, the forces of criticism, the opponents of this project have grown. The current government I think is not willing to change their original course. They’ve always held that this is a business venture and that there is no government money directly involved and why should they stop the companies if the companies believe they can make money with this pipeline? Why not?

One aspect which, of course, also needs to be factored into the equation is if one argues that by building an additional pipeline, we’re actually subsidizing the Russian government’s ability to finance all sorts of hostile activities, well, the United States government has also allowed U.S. companies to buy literally hundreds of millions of barrels of oils from Russia in recent years. It’s not only a German problem, it’s a slightly broader problem.

I believe that there should be a European solution to the pipeline project. I think it was a mistake by my own government not to turn this over to the EU early on and say, “Let’s come up with a European solution to a problem which is–" because this is not just a German pipeline, it has of course political and energy and other implications for a number of neighbors and actually for the entire region and for our relationship with Russia.

So, dealing with it as a bilateral issue, in my view, was wrong, but here we are. I think there will be a policy change come September after the elections.

CASPER KLYNGE: Fascinating. I wish we could continue this discussion a lot longer, but we’re unfortunately out of time. You know, I always learn a lot from listening to you and speaking to you. So, I want to thank you a lot, Ambassador Ischinger – Wolfgang – for being on our pod today and for sharing what I think was a bit of a masterclass on global issues, on European politics, on the trans-Atlantic relationship, and at least the role that technology and digitalization is playing today and what we also need to do as the private sector.

So, thanks a lot for this, and I look forward to us being able to be together at the Munich Security Conference in Munich as soon as possible.

WOLFGANG ISCHINGER: Thank you very much, Casper. This has been great fun, a pleasure chatting with you. Let me just conclude myself by saying that without partners like your company, like Microsoft and others, we could, of course, not do this work. We depend on partners and sponsor from foundations and large companies around the world and I’m very grateful for the kind of cooperative relationship that we’ve had that allows us to be bold going forward. Thanks again.

CASPER KLYNGE: My pleasure. Thanks a lot for the partnership and have a good day, Wolfgang. Thanks a lot.

13

Tech Fit 4 Europe podcast Episode 11 Guest: Wolfgang Ischinger

WOLFGANG ISCHINGER: Thank you very much, Casper. Pleasure.

CASPER KLYNGE: Bye. Thanks for listening to this episode of Tech Fit 4 Europe. If you haven’t done so already, hit subscribe on your preferred podcast platform to be notified when the next episode goes live.

We also want to know what you think of the pod. Is there a key digital policy issue we should discuss or a key influencer you’d like to hear from? Share your views on social media and please pass this episode on to anyone who might enjoy it. Until next time.

# END

14