The CEO

From Joe Wright, director of Atonement and Darkest Hour, comes Mussolini, Son of the Century, an eight-episode series streaming on Mubi.

Luca Marinelli stars in what critics are calling a towering performance of puffed-up vanity, bringing Mussolini's rise to life with bold cinematic storytelling, magnetic performances, and an unforgettable score by Tom Rowlands of the Chemical Brothers.

Already hailed as remarkable and gripping, Mussolini's Son of the Century is a daring new vision of the past, streaming September 10th on Movie.

Charlie Sheen is an icon of decadence.

I lit the fuse, and my life turns into everything it wasn't supposed to be.

He's going the distance.

He was the highest-paid TV star of all time.

When it started to change, it was quick.

He kept saying, No, no, no, I'm in the hospital now, but next week I'll be ready for the show.

Now, Charlie's sober.

He's gonna tell you the truth.

How do I present this with any class?

I think we're past that, Charlie.

We're past that, yeah.

Somebody call action.

AKA Charlie Sheen, only on Netflix, September 10th.

I was born on the wrong side of the Berlin Wall.

When I visited Ronald Reagan's Reinhardt Center in Santa Barbara, California in 2016, I had a big piece of the wall Reagan helped tear down on display.

I joked that I didn't recognize it because I had only seen the other side.

Back in 1987, I was speaking at an event in West Germany, and I told people that I was sure that the collapse of the Berlin Wall was inevitable and would happen very soon.

They looked at me like, okay, that's crazy, but he's young, 24, and he's just a chess player.

What does he know?

And they stopped listening.

This was before Ronald Reagan's famous tear down this wall speech in Berlin, which was around a month later.

Another famous forewords from U.S.

president also concerned Berlin.

President Harry Truman said, we stay in Berlin to promise that U.S.

forces would protect and supply West Berlin during Stalin's siege of the city in 1948, the famous Berlin airlift.

Not to put myself in the company of U.S.

presidents, but I was inspired by Reagan and Truman in my own Berlin speech at the Aspen Institute on October 14, 2015.

I titled it, Four Words to Change History.

I said, we must remember that societies do not have values.

People have values.

If we want our values to succeed, we must protect the people who hold them, wherever they are, whoever they are.

And if I may finish with my own four words here today, fight for our values

from the Atlantic.

This is Autocracy in America.

I'm Gary Kusporov.

My guest is Matthias Doffner, joining me from Berlin.

He is a journalist who is now the CEO of the multinational media and technology company Axel Springer.

He leads dozens of publications in many countries, including Political and Business Insider in the United States and built and developed in Germany, among many others.

He is German, and it is the German perspective I was after from him.

Many around Europe and the world are waiting for Germany to lead.

So will it?

Hello, Matthias.

Thank you very much for joining our program.

Hello, Gary.

Quick question.

Are you at your office now?

Absolutely, at my office in Berlin.

So I want to let the listeners know that this office that was built by the founder of Jacomput Axel Springer, if I'm correct in 1966, It's literally

next to the former Berlin Wall that divided, physically divided the free and unfree world back during the Cold War.

So it was standing on the edge of democracy and autocracy.

Not anymore now.

But not to put too fine a point on it, it is precisely what this show is about.

So from this perch, tell me, what do you see as a principal threats to democracy in Europe?

And what is European or Europe's place in this ever-changing world today?

Yeah, thank you, Gary.

So sitting here in our kind of historic headquarter building, it's a golden skyscraper right at the edge of the former wall and death stripe.

Just to illustrate that when we literally cross the street in order to get to the new part of our headquarter, we cross a row of cobblestones and these cobblestones are marking exactly the spot where the wall used to be.

So, this building literally was built as a lighthouse of freedom, as the founder called it.

It turned out to be the new center of a reunified Berlin and a reunified Germany, with a lot of euphoria around the idea that freedom prevails, the open society model prevails.

And at the moment, it looks quite different.

And it looks different from a factual base.

If you check the

results of Freedom House analysis and other comparable analysis of the state of freedom,

then you see a freedom recession globally for many years.

There's never been such a significant downgrading of formerly free countries to partly free and formerly partly free countries to unfree.

But also most of the centrist democracies are in relatively weak shape, whereas autocratic authoritarian systems pretty systematically achieve their goals and gain ground.

So it's quite a challenging time for the open society model and on top of that we have internal issues.

I think we should not only look at the external threats and the autocrats and dictators, we should also look at ourselves and what we need to do differently in order to succeed.

Agreed.

So let's look deep inside.

Let's start with Germany.

So 35 years ago there was a reunification.

Many believed, you know, it would be beyond

our wildest dreams and it would never happen.

It did happen.

Has unification happened in minds as well as geographically and politically?

Well, Gary, I'm not a diplomat, so I speak very openly.

Also, if it's about my own country, I remember very well when the war came down.

A prominent publisher here in Berlin, Wolf Schüp Siegler, said it's going to take at least a generation until we will see real

integration of mindset and until we see real unification psychologically and mentally.

I thought this is totally exaggerated.

It's going to be a question of two, three, five years.

It's now more than a quarter of a century and still there is quite a significant divide.

There is still an East and a West Germany and you see that on many levels also politically.

At the same time, we also have to

realistically see that all together with regard to management and the economy, the reunification was a success and went well and there is a lot of prosperity.

And if you go to the East German cities and compare them, how they looked like 30 years ago, uncomparable.

And there is so much progress and wealth and

positive development that we should also not be too negative about it.

We should be also a bit thankful.

On the third level, and that I think is the most important one, Germany has developed for many various reasons a degree of complacency

that I find more and more dangerous.

And I think we have to really take that as a warning call to do things differently.

And here, of course, there is a lot of hope with regard to the new government that is in place.

and that could with strong leadership solve the problems most importantly the problem of an economic turnaround.

And with regard to migration, we also need a very significant shift conceptually.

And with regard to execution, I think those are the two most important topics.

But that requires really bold decisions and leadership.

After unification, Germany has become the largest country in Europe and it's an driving engine of European Union.

But considering the historical

call it liabilities or historical baggage, so is Germany ready now, after so many years, eight years since the end of the World War II, is Germany ready to overcome this sense of historical guilt and to become a positive force, to take a lead?

That's a very interesting question, Gary, because truly I think this phase of German history during the Third Reich,

the Holocaust and everything that

led to this unparalleled horrors

have deeply traumatized the country and in a way discredited the term leadership and the idea of leadership and even the idea of excellence to a certain degree.

The unfortunate misunderstanding of

this chapter of German history is

that not only you should never be involved in any form of military conflict, pacifism as a naive idea.

The second horrible misunderstanding is that leadership and excellence is almost something negative.

It associates with Germany needs to lead the world and needs to dominate the world.

And the irony is that almost everybody in Europe and in the entire world is waiting.

for German leadership and thinks Germany needs to lead.

It needs to lead Europe together with other countries.

And that leads me to the second element of your question.

Are we able to overcome the traumas?

Hopefully not in the sense that we forget about it.

I think what happened should never be forgotten and we should learn from that, but we should learn the right lessons.

And the right lessons are

always

do everything to defend the free and open society model.

And if we lead with

good intentions and in a spirit of partnership together with others, then I think that is the most credible and the most successful mindset.

I think apart from a right value set and system of coordinates, the most important

thing that the new German Chancellor needs to prove and needs to have is courage to move fast, to act and not only speak, and to really tackle the two biggest priorities, economy and migration.

Yeah, I think of

one of the Winston Churchill's famous phrases that no success is final, no failure is fatal.

What counts is the courage to continue.

Because he has challenges both domestically and internationally.

So you mentioned economy and migration.

Now, do you consider energy independence as a part of the economy?

Very big issue.

Here the elephant in the room is nuclear energy.

Will this government go back to nuclear power plants?

That is the big question that everybody is asking at the moment in Germany because an energy policy that is based on windmills and or only solar

is not going to solve the problems and is not going to provide the energy that you need also with regard to excellence in artificial intelligence.

But

let us again remind our audience that Germany made a decision to walk away from nuclear energy, what back in 2011, yes?

Yeah, I remember, I can share an anecdote with you.

I remember very well, I was invited to the Russian embassy by the Russian ambassador with a group of editors of

Axel Springer for lunch.

And it was a coincidence that the lunch took place on that very day.

And each person had a glass of vodka at the table.

And before we started, the ambassador was raising the vodka glasses and said, let me cheer to the German Chancellor.

The decision to drop out of nuclear energy will be very good for Russian energy and for the Russian economy.

And people looked a little bit irritated and basically thought it's a joke, but then they realized it was...

It was the greatest gift to Putin.

Right, exactly.

Because that made Russia the sole supplier or the major supplier of energy to Germany and via Germany to many other European countries.

I personally think it was one of the most irresponsible decisions of German governments in post-war history, because not only did it create the biggest damage to the German economy and the German energy sector, but more importantly, it has basically strengthened and financed the Putin

that we have to deal with since then, and the Putin who then invaded Crimea and who then invaded Ukraine.

And the money

is one of the main resources that has funded that war.

It's quite a sad case, and it shows again why trade policy, economic policy, is so directly intertwined with geopolitics and security politics.

And that's why this whole decision to drop out of nuclear energy is way, way bigger than just a topic in the context of coalition scenarios or

energy policies.

It goes way beyond that.

Now, the German political map today, again, I'm old enough, remember when Germany was in a classic two-party system, you know, Social Democrats on the center left and the Christian Democrats on the right.

Now it's a mess.

But the danger is that we could see in Germany, as everywhere, both in America and in Europe,

the

growing strengths of the radicals on the far left and far right.

So the German political map today has a great

number of MPs and growing strengths of both IFD alternative for Deutschland, far-right, and also two far-left groups.

So how do you describe this new

political realignment and how dangerous is the threat of these combined attacks on democracy from the far right and far left?

Obviously the far-right

group is much bigger.

IFDA won more than 20% in the last elections.

And I think now their popularity level stands at nearly 25%.

So just give us just a little bit of a sense of this very dispersed political field.

So political map is quite messy for the traditional two-party system.

This phenomenon,

I think it is simply the result of failed and unsuccessful centrist policies and the lack of credibility of centrist political leaders.

So if we tackle that problem, we should first look at what did the centrist parties, what did the older parties, the political establishment, do wrong, and why feel people the need to look for alternatives and shift more to the extremes?

Why are they seduced by the easy solutions?

And I think that is also a pretty global phenomenon where the extremes are getting stronger.

The center has made mistakes and should start with self-criticism.

Now, concretely to Germany, both extremes are very dangerous and have some ideas that are very anti-constitutional and particularly dangerous with regard to geopolitics and the future of open societies.

Yeah, I want to just talk a bit more about IFD, alternative for Deutschland, because the other far-right groups and parties like in France, the Marie Le Pence or Nigel Farage Reform Party in Great Britain, they refuse to deal with AFD.

They believe it's too far-right and it has an open nostalgia for Nazi Germany.

So can you tell us more about the nature of this party and its threat it can represent to German democracy and to European integration?

Because it's of course

against United Europe.

Well, I think indeed the foreign policy concept, the geopolitical consequences of that, are by far the biggest threat that this party provides.

The

admiration for strong men and autocratic countries like almost Russia, but also China and others reflect a totally different idea of society, a different idea of leadership.

And also the consequences geopolitically would be

horrific, I think, for the open society model and the world order that we are discussing today.

That's why I find it particularly hard to understand why this movement is so much more popular in the eastern

states of Germany than in the western part of Germany.

And that is actually counterintuitive because you should think,

like other Eastern European countries who basically experienced Soviet communism and the ruthlessness of that system, that should lead to a lot of realistic and skeptical

expectations with regard to future relationships with Russia and the future influence of Russia or dealing with China.

But the opposite seems to be true.

And that is, for me, very hard to explain.

And honestly, Gary, I have no very convincing explanation for that.

Let's talk about a symbolis to AFD, not from East, but from the West, actually far, far West,

in DC.

So it seems there are quite a few fans of AFD in Trump's administration.

Definitely it's J.D.

Vance, who openly supported not just AFD, but almost every far-right political group in Europe that was fighting in the elections to get into power.

So

how do you explain that?

Well, I think it would be particularly negative for the United States because in large parts of the party there is a deeply rooted anti-Americanist approach, a deeply rooted anti-capitalist approach.

And

I would be curious how that would play out with regard to the transatlantic relationship.

I mean just take the very concrete request or proposal, no American weapons on German ground.

That's funny.

Putin will like that, but that's not good for Germany.

Now maybe

Some people in America may say, well, that's nice for America because we have lower

expenses in that context.

But I think the price that the United States would pay in the long term for that would be enormous, would go up definitely, because a Putin that is encouraged by such a move would not stop in Ukraine.

He would go further.

So am I hearing you saying that without America, without American leadership, the global democracy will be in

peril and may collapse?

Yes.

I think it's a very nice but slightly naive idea that now the big historic opportunity is since America is sending a lot of disturbing and surprising signals, Europe could do it alone or could do it better.

It's not going to work.

The challenges of China, the challenges of Russia and the challenges of Islamist dictatorships

are much too big in order to be solved by Europe alone and I would even go that far they are also way too big than

being solvable by the United States alone.

Woldride Beck

Tires matter.

They're the only part of your vehicle that touches the road.

Tread confidently with new tires from Tire Rack.

Whether you're looking for expert recommendations or know exactly what you want, Tire Rack makes it easy.

Fast, free shipping, free road hazard protection, convenient installation options, and the best selection of Bridgestone tires.

Go to tire rack.com to see their Bridgestone test results, tire ratings, and reviews.

And be sure to check out all the special offers.

TireRack.com, the way tire buying should be.

Running a business comes with a lot of what-ifs.

That's why you need Shopify.

They'll help you create a convenient, unified command center for whatever your business throws at you, whether you sell online, in-store, or both.

You can sell the way you want, attract the customers you need, and keep them coming back.

Turn those what-ifs into why-nots with Shopify.

Sign up for your $1 per month trial at shopify.com/slash special offer.

That's shopify.com slash special offer.

But let's look at this geopolitical chessboard.

The United States, China.

And of course, Russia is still there, so it's a relatively small economy, but you have nukes, you have, you know, army, you have a crazy dictator who made war as an engine of his power.

And what is Europe here?

Because I think one of the problems between Europe and America, now the way I think the Trump administration is viewing Europe, is Europe is divided, is too weak, and Germany is not ready to play the leading role to unite Europe and to make it speak with one voice that could put Europe at this negotiating table and make

European opinion, European power, to be counted.

Do we believe that Europe still has this potential, again led by Germany, to make herself relevant?

The short answer is yes.

Europe is a sleeping beauty.

It's just a great continent with wonderful countries and a beautiful, probably the most attractive lifestyle in the world.

But it's also sleeping.

It's sleeping because it developed a very dangerous degree of complacency.

Now, the question is, can that be changed?

And here my

My take is more optimistic.

I think what is happening at the moment in the world is very disturbing.

And it can be the beginning of the end.

It can be the beginning of the end of the open society model, of the idea of a free rules-based society, of democracy, of the rule of law, of human rights, and we will have a very different world order.

Now, being at the verge of that and seeing the dangers and facing a lot of volatility in the United States and a lot of rigor and aggression in non-democratic superpowers like China, I think it has the potential to really be the healthy wake-up call, the healthy wake-up call for democracy in the open society model, and the healthy wake-up call for Europe.

And then I think that would be a reawakening of Europe.

And suddenly, in 10 years, the world can look completely different.

People may say, wow, what a shift of labor,

excellence, know-how, value creation to European countries.

What a different world where these open societies stick together and build strategic alliances in the economy, but also in the field of defense and security.

So I truly think we are at a pivotal moment where both is possible.

The beginning of the end or the healthy wake-up call that starts a new

decade, a new century where Europe plays a more important and a better role.

You said, I think, sleeping beauty.

That's for me, that doesn't constitute any strengths.

So it's basically waiting for

a courageous prince to

wake her up with a magic kiss.

Is it sleeping beauty or sleeping giant?

That's a very good point.

It's a beautiful giant.

That's an interesting mixture, yes.

It's in any case, I mean, we definitely agree that it's sleeping at the moment, but I also agree with your criticism that beauty is not enough.

And I think with the right injection of energy and ambition and aspiration, it can be

a new player, a new giant.

Three and a half years of war in Ukraine.

You can hear them from Berlin.

Was it not enough to wake Europe up?

So how come that in three and a half years, Europe, Europe, has provided less help for Ukraine than North Korea, for Russia?

You are still contemplating your next moves.

You don't want to see that Putin is at war with Europe.

It's a kind of hybrid war.

He has been openly interfering in elections in Germany, in Romania, in France, in Britain.

So everywhere.

What else do you need to wake up?

And let's again go back to Germany.

So can Germany just take a lead?

Three and a half years have been lost.

So

what does come next?

First of all, Gary, I totally agree with your analysis.

Secondly, I don't have a very good answer why it's still sleeping.

I wrote a text a few days after the invasion in Ukraine and said this is now a moment where the West has to act, where NATO members have to act, whether it's under Article 5 or not.

But this is the moment where we have to show strength because only strength and military

deterrence is avoiding an escalation and is avoiding a bigger and long-lasting conflict.

And if we don't do that, the price is going to be higher.

I was criticized as a warmonger.

I was criticized to risk a nuclear escalation and so on.

So

from today's perspective, it feels quite sad because I still think and I'm still deeply convinced had we acted faster and more determinedly, we could have avoided a large degree of what has happened since then.

And now we're in a much worse place.

Nevertheless, I think it is not too late.

And if you just take also the percentage of

budgets that

NATO members and the West is basically investing in order to stop Putin.

It is so minor, it is so minimal compared to what Putin is investing.

And that leads me to the very simple

result.

If we would want to stop that, we could stop it.

And there is, I don't know, it's a mix of opportunism and naivety, and also a wrong narrative that only if we are nice to Putin and if we are not focusing too much on

military force, only then can we calm him down, which is so wrong.

It is reading so much the mind of almost all totalitarian leaders, and particularly of Putin, who is basically testing the West and always seeing how far can he go.

And the further we let him go, the more he will do, and the higher the price is going to be.

So it is already late.

It's not too late, but

we wasted a lot of time.

Again, realistically, so whatever we say about NATO and its historical role, the role it has played over 75 75 years,

I mean, it's dead now.

It's not functioning.

And definitely in the next three plus years, while Trump is in the office, nobody expects NATO to

be what it used to be, or just that's the organization that we relied upon

for decades.

I share your optimism that eventually there will be some kind of new alignment or realignment in the European-American relations.

The global democracies will get together, but that's in the future.

But currently we have the war.

So can Germany, in your opinion,

lead this new defense alliance as the prototype for the

future version of NATO to make sure that this war can be won or at least Ukraine can survive the Russian onslaught?

And

what are the limits for Germany in building such an alliance?

How realistic is to envision the German role as an engine for this defense coalition?

Can Germany do that?

Yes, Germany can do that.

Will Germany do that is more complex.

And here, I think there is one psychological reason why there is a risk that it's not happening.

And I mentioned that already.

It is history.

It is a bit this fear of taking military leadership.

I mean, the world was fearing for decades, for good reasons, for German military initiatives, for military ambitions, in a way for military leadership.

And I think that is also a very, very kind of

poisoned ground.

And that may lead to more reluctance than we need.

And

that could be a reason why it's not happening or why it's not happening fast enough.

But if I may, let us also

not forget the possibility that something happens that may be surprising from today's perspective, but psychologically not unlikely.

And that is the more Putin plays with Trump, the more he publicly embarrasses Trump, gaining time, not making real concessions, not sticking to agreements, the more

Donald Trump could feel provoked.

And if Putin continues to do that, then I think Trump could surprise everybody by really changing his mind completely.

And then we could have a totally different situation, not only psychologically, but also militarily.

I'm afraid you're a dreamer, Matthias.

Maybe I am a dreamer, yeah.

But

do you really think that it's realistic that Trump leaves the field as the loser,

having been kind of

outsmarted by Putin and basically saying, okay, I resign,

you won, Vladimir,

I just leave the battlefield as a loser.

For me, it's also hard to imagine, simply psychologically.

Yes, but Trump's psychology,

it's always to turn any failure into a victory.

So,

okay, now just going to the end of our conversation.

So,

let's concentrate on what Germany could, should, and hopefully will do.

So,

will Germany

move on with the rearmament plans?

So, investing heavily in this milli-industrial complex, building new weapons, and

becoming a

military powerhouse again.

I think the likelihood is very high if you just look to the kind of changes in social behavior.

Just a few years ago,

people from the defense industry were not even invited to dinner parties.

Today, they are stars of dinner parties.

Everybody talks to them.

They are perceived as heroes.

They are perceived as guards of

freedom and democracy.

So, the mindset has really fundamentally changed.

And also, the number of startups that is dealing with drones and is dealing with new technologies of defense is skyrocketing.

People are preparing for that and everybody sees the need for that.

So the likelihood that that mindset changes is pretty high.

So do you think that it's realistic that Germany will also build its strong army that will become the core of this

military barrier against potential Russian aggression?

That's a long shot.

I don't know how developed the willingness of

German people is to defend their country.

I think it's already tough to defend our country and even tougher to defend Europe.

But maybe I have a slightly maybe my take is too negative here.

Yeah, no, no, but it it's very important here, because I'm I'm afraid, you know, I I share your pessimism here, but you know that all these all these guns, you know, all these uh shells, all these drones, they they are not um too uh effective without uh the the willpower behind it, without manpower behind it.

And it seems to me that Germany is yet to cross this road.

So it's like from

West Berlin to East Berlin.

So just from this historical guilt, from this peacemongering to war reality.

Can you imagine, just now, that it's as a part of this coalition, Germany may develop nuclear weapons to deter Russia?

Unlikely.

Unlikely.

So that means that Germany will always depend on other countries because

the successful deterrence is not, against Russia, will not work without a nuclear umbrella.

So who will provide a nuclear umbrella if during Trump's years?

France, Britain?

How do you think Germany will manage it?

Maybe France and Britain will play a bigger role.

That's a possibility.

But again, I think without America, it's going to be very tough.

That's why it is in our very vital interest to

keep a healthy relationship with America, regardless whether we like the government or not.

It's an overarching

paradigm I think for

Europe and for Germany.

So just very final question.

So you just give us the next three years, just for the next three years of Trump administration.

What would be the ideal outcome for us to dream about 2028 from the German perspective?

Strong German leadership leads to conceptual priorities.

One is to

lead Europe in military strength and support in Ukrainian defense in order to limit Putin's aggression.

That will impress the United States because a stronger Europe will be taken more seriously, and Europe that does more for its own defense will be more credible as a partner to negotiate deals on other levels.

And the second thing will be changed in Germany and in Europe, and that is that

we reach out to America agreeing on a mutual strategy, trade strategy towards China, defend that strategy together at the negotiation table, achieve a much, much better deal with China.

That strengthens Europe and America, that weakens Putin, that limits China, that strengthens the democratic world.

that will be the beginning of a new prosperous era for America, America first from an American perspective and a stronger Europe, Europe first from a European perspective, but based on mutual values excelling together.

That would be the most optimistic outcome that would strengthen the open society model and freedom and democracy.

But Gary, honestly, that is the ultimate degree of optimism that I can develop at this stage.

Let's work on that.

Let's hope for it.

But let's not count on it.

Prepare for the worst in order to get positively surprised.

Yes, we can prepare for the worst, but it's very important to have a vision and thank you very much for laying down this positive vision, Matthias.

So and I hope that at least part of this vision will be realized soon.

That would be something.

And the first of all is of course you know for Ukraine A to survive, B to win and eventually Putin regime to collapse and Europe to become a real geopolitical player to wake up from its sleep and to become a, as you said, beautiful giant on the world stage.

Wonderful.

I totally agree.

Yes, thank you very much, Matthias.

Thank you.

Thank you, Gary.

This episode of Autocracy in America was produced by Arlene Aravolo.

Our editor is Dave Shaw.

Original music and mix by Rob Smirciak.

Fact-checking by Anna Alvarado.

Special thanks to Pauline Pasparo and Meg Gringott.

Claudia Nebate is the executive producer of Atlantic Audio.

Andre Valdes is our managing editor.

Next time, on autocracy in America.

We are an example that a country can live, can have a great standard, can have free speech, can have human rights in quite a short time.

And I think that is the painful thing for Kremlin.

They do not want to see successful countries from the former empire.

because it might lead their people to think that there is another way.

There is another track for their country as well.

And that is definitely very scary for the regime.

I'm Gary Kaspov.

See you back here next week.