op-ed in Time Magazine<\/a>, in the summer of 2016, in which you called for a \u201cnew grand bargain with Russia\u201d. Four years later, is there enough trust left between Russia and the US to still consider such a grand bargain? <\/p>\n\n\n\nStavridis:<\/strong> What we have learnt in four years is that, first of all, it is highly unlikely that Vladimir Putin will leave power. Secondly we\u2019ve learnt that Mr Putin will continue to try to attack and disrupt the US as he did in 2016 in our elections. And thirdly, I think we\u2019ve learnt that the only thing Russia fundamentally responds to is its own self-interest. There is no value set in Russia that we can appeal to. So that\u2019s the difference, in 2020, to 2016. And therefore, going forward with Russia, I think the idea of a grand bargain, a big basket of changes that kind of come together, is unrealistic. So today I would advocate for a policy that goes as follows: we should confront the Russian Federation where we must, where Vladimir Putin\u2019s actions are so deleterious to the international system. Examples would be his support for the war criminal Assad in Syria, his invasion and occupation of Ukraine, his continuing military probes around the edges of the Alliance [NATO], his use of cyber and social networks to attack democracy in the US and in other ally countries\u2026 We must confront Russia on those issues. <\/p>\n\n\n\nRoos: <\/strong>But if we want a minimum level of trust to remain, cooperation, however limited, is needed\u2026 <\/p>\n\n\n\nStavridis:<\/strong> Yes. But we should confront where we must and cooperate wherever we can. So what are the zones of cooperation with the Russian Federation? Hopefully we can cooperate on strategic arms limitation. The Strategic Arms Limitation Talks (SALT) [a flagship treaty of the Cold War signed by Richard Nixon and Leonid Brejnev in 1972, limiting anti-ballistic missiles] expires next February, and I think it would put the world in a much more dangerous and precarious situation if we can\u2019t renegotiate a strategic arms limitation treaty. We can definitely cooperate there. We can also, I think, cooperate on climate, on counter-piracy operations, on counter-narcotics, on counter-terrorism. We may even be able to cooperate with Russia to help solve future conflicts like the war between Armenia and Azerbaijan for example. So rather than trying to construct a grand bargain, today our strategy with Russia ought to be confront where we must on those issues that deeply matter and are consubstantial with our values, and cooperate where we can in hope that, overtime, Russia will change its position, change its attitude, and want even greater levels of cooperation \u2013 only then may be the time for a grand bargain, but not now.<\/p>\n\n\n\nAs NATO supreme commander, Stavridis, left, joined in a Helsinki defense conference in October 2012. Photo: British Army Staff Sgt. Ian Houlding<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\nRoos: <\/strong>Regarding relationships amongst allies, Turkey has been at the centre of the attention lately, especially in Europe, where confrontations between the Turkish and other NATO allies\u2019 navies (the Greek and the French ones in particular) in the Eastern Mediterranean have intensified. This comes a few years after another NATO crisis, triggered by the decision of Turkey to buy the S-400 anti-aircraft weapon system from Russia. To a certain extent, you have a very personal relation to Turkey, as your paternal grandparents fled the Ottoman Empire in the 1920s when others in their family were not as lucky and got killed during what is now called by some historians the \u201cPontic Genocide\u201d [the systematic killing of the Christian Greek minority in Anatolia in 1914-1922]. As SACEUR, you worked very closely with high-ranking Turkish officials. How does a leader manage to separate one\u2019s own personal feelings from one\u2019s duty? And how can we keep trust between partners and allies in spite of all the trauma of History? <\/p>\n\n\n\nStavridis:<\/strong> Indeed, my grandparents were refugees from the Ottoman Empire. In 1922 they were driven out of what was then called Smyrna -which is today Izmir, and barely escaped with their lives. My grandmother stood on a burning quay wall in the city of Smyrna and was rescued by a Greek fisherman who brought her to Athens and then she and my grandfather took ship and came to America through Ellis Island. So yes, you\u2019re right, I have personal family history that binds me with Turkey, and technically I\u2019m of Turkish descent in the sense that my grandparents were citizens of the Ottoman Empire; they spoke Turkish, French, English and Greek obviously. And the way I approached this was to go immediately to Turkey when I became SACEUR.<\/p>\n\n\n\nMy very first official visit as SACEUR was to Ankara. And I met and worked very closely with the Minister of Defence and the Minister of Foreign Affairs. I also became very close, over those years, with Ahmet Davuto\u011flu, who went on to become Prime Minister and with whom I\u2019ve remained in contact and friendship to this day. I worked also very closely with the former Chief of Defence, currently Minister of National Defence, General Hulusi Akar. So my point is: we have to respect the past, understand our history, but we can\u2019t be imprisoned by it. And that was the message I took to Ankara. And by the way, during my four years as SACEUR, Turkey was an extremely productive and positive force in the Alliance, sending troops, ships and aircrafts on every single mission, including Libya, which back then was controversial. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
I\u2019ll close here by sharing an anecdote: after four years of working closely with Turkey, I went to Ankara to say farewell, meeting with President Erdo\u011fan and Prime Minister Davuto\u011flu. And as is traditional, they presented me with a gift as I was leaving; and instead of what you would normally expect, a fountain pen or a beautiful vase or local piece of art, they presented me with a book of vintage postcards about the Greek community in Smyrna a hundred years earlier. It was very moving! And the Minister said to me: \u201cyou have showed us that we must remember the past but not be imprisoned by it.\u201d And so, that\u2019s a long way of saying you can build trust, personal relationships do matter, you have to understand History but be able to move beyond it. A good example at a macro level is what is happening today in Colombia, or South Africa, or Rwanda, in all these nations where there have been horrific and terrible levels of violence. But, as difficult as it is, all these nations are working hard to try and move beyond that, and they exact accountability but they also recognise that what matters is the truth and the ability of a society to move forward, to remember the past but not be imprisoned by it. That is the essence of trust. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/symposium.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/11\/131029_fletcher_dean_helsinki.jpg\")