Plan A – Credible Deterrence, Plan B – Defense: A Reflection on the Berlin Security Conference 2025

Discussions at the Berlin Security Conference 2025, one of Europe’s largest annual events on security and defense, shared similar conclusions: Plan A, credible deterrence, must be pursued vigorously so that Plan B, defense, never comes into effect. Related discussions concerned European resilience, the Swedish model of “Total Defense,” NATO’s European pillar, the endurance of the “Transatlantic bond”, and industrial capabilities. While the Women, Peace and Security Agenda found its way into the discussions on deterrence and defense, the number of women in speaking roles was kept to a minimum. The conference’s 24th edition recently took place from November 18-19, 2025, at Vienna House Andel’s in Berlin. Alexandra von Vultejus attended the conference and is sharing her perspective.

This year’s Berlin Security Conference primarily focused on exchanges between the military and defense sector and political decision-makers. Participants from think tanks and scientific communities were, at best, involved only as listeners. Topics covered a variety of contemporary questions, ranging from threat perceptions in the High North and the Arctic, to the “Russia problem” (comment by General Michael Claesson, Chief of Defense, Sweden), industrial technology capabilities, Transatlantic relations, societal resilience, and Europe’s changing security architecture. Members of parliaments, politicians, and senior executives of the military, security organizations and industry discussed it all (see BSC 2025 program) across various high-level debates on the main stage, smaller panel sessions, as well as keynotes and, most importantly, informal exchanges in the moments between agenda points. 

To enter the event location, attendees had to make their way through a maze of industry exhibits, pass a model of a Taurus missile, walk down several flights of stairs, and finally enter the vault-like main conference hall, illuminated by dark blue lighting. While participants of such a conference are primarily concerned with security policy and strategic orientations—perhaps interested in getting somewhat informed by the industry on current cutting-edge technologies and industrial possibilities—the interior design, in conjunction with intensive advertising and industry sales pitches, lent the event a slightly peculiar atmosphere overall. 

Resilience and Credible Deterrence

Overarching themes in the discussions were resilience and credible deterrence, both within NATO and Europe specifically, with clear perceived threat priorities: Russia, terrorism, and China—in that order. Speakers such as Florian Hahn, Minister of State at the German Federal Foreign Office, acknowledged that, against the backdrop of Russia’s full-scale war of aggression against Ukraine, Europe finds itself neither at a time of war, nor at a time of peace. German Minister of Defense Boris Pistorius emphasized that Russia’s aggression is not limited locally, given staggering hybrid attacks on various European states. European representatives repeatedly stressed their firm continued support and admiration for the perseverance and braveness of Ukraine and their joint destiny. Since Plan A is credible deterrence, and only Plan B is defense (as formulated by General Ingo Gerhartz, Commander, Joint Force Command Brunssum), the discussions predominately circled the question of how to achieve—the much preferred—Plan A, including attending to resilience, the Swedish model of “Total Defense”, NATO’s European pillar, the endurance of the “Transatlantic bond”, and Europe’s industrial capabilities. 

A Swedish Guide Towards “Total Defense”

As this year’s partner nation of the conference, Swedish officials were prominently represented in various formats, including HRH Victoria, Crown Princess of Sweden. The highlight of the two-day conference was the signing of a new Memorandum of Understanding to formalize more integrated cooperation by Swedish Minister of Defense Dr. Pål Jonson and German Minister of Defense Boris Pistorius. European counterparts listened eagerly to Sweden’s lessons on “Total Defense,” their in-house comprehensive strategy encompassing both military and civil defense, aimed at preparing the country for potential conflicts, according to which all citizens aged 16 to 70 years old assume some form of responsibility. Applicability to other contexts, such as Germany, was further touched upon during a side-panel on “Resilience as a Strategic Capability”. At this event, Dr. Patricia Schneider from the Bundeswehr Command and Staff College stressed social trust and trust in institutions as key factors for societal resilience. A closer examination of the rise of the far-right in the Transatlantic and European sphere, with its potential impact on unity within countries and across the alliance could have brought insight into a crucial topic otherwise missing from the overall conference. 

The Women, Peace and Security Agenda in Deterrence and Defense

Amidst discussions of societal resilience, the Women, Peace and Security Agenda was brought into the conference. In her keynote speech, Mrs. Irene Fellin, NATO Secretary General’s Special Representative for Women, Peace and Security, stressed that through the WPS lens, “Total Defense” does not mean a militarized society, but the evolution towards collective defense, since resilient and strong nations lead to a strong alliance.

During the side panel on “Women, Peace and Security in Deterrence and Defense,” the speakers explicated how WPS, in their conviction and work, connects to deterrence and defense. In peacetime, the WPS Agenda can work towards conflict prevention, by integrating gender analysis in all policy decisions and strengthening resilience – as a part of deterrence – through more equal, democratic and educated societies. During wartime, WPS can focus on creating safer environments (for instance modular buildings for displaced families), supporting victims of sexual violence including male abused prisoners of war, fighting gender backlash, and showing women at the frontline—the latter not as symbol but as a necessity.

The underlying consensus was that a changing security environment required WPS to adapt, and that the misconception of WPS only holding relevance for out-of-area missions must be countered by recognizing its relevance for deterrence and defense. Notably, this side panel was one of only two discussions at this year’s conference with more female than male panelists (including moderators), especially on a topic which concerns not only women, but everyone. The inclusion of a keynote speech and a panel discussion on the Women, Peace, and Security Agenda could thus not hide the fact that women are still severely underrepresented in the field of international security (according to UN Women). This was exemplified by women accounting for only around 10% of speakers at this year’s conference, predominately taking on moderator roles. Overall, women were again not given sufficient consideration as strong voices in security policy. 

The Endurance of the “Transatlantic Bond”

Despite—or perhaps thanks to—ongoing dismissals of European interests from the current US administration, many speakers stressed the importance and endurance of the “Transatlantic bond.” Moreover, European panelists appeared relieved when US representatives kept stressing their firm commitment to Art. 5 and the alliance. In one conversation on “Europe’s Role in a Multipolar World,” US Ambassador to NATO, H.E. Matthew G. Whitaker, explained how the US administration was looking forward to Europe taking on more responsibility within the alliance, potentially including SACEUR further down the line. The latter proposition was skeptically refused by German Lieutenant General Wolfgang Wien, German Military Representative to the NATO and EU Military Committee. The US Ambassador to NATO furthermore underlined that the free-riding of member states must end. The European representatives, who reiterated the need for greater responsibility on the part of Europe, thus rather gave the impression of preaching to the choir.  

The European Pillar of NATO

Consequently, a strengthened European pillar within NATO, possibly under German leadership, was discussed. However, Alan Meltzer, Chargé d’Affaires of the US Embassy in Berlin, shared in a pointed comment that the current tendency towards “European protectionism” in defense technology was not perceived positively in the US. There appears to be a general mismatch between US interests in selling technology off the shelf and European skepticism of a continued dependency. Regardless, there seemed to be agreement that NATO must become more European in order to remain Transatlantic, as summarized by German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius in his keynote address. Later at the conference, representatives of the defense industry and the European Defense Agency, as well as political and military leaders, discussed how capacity-building for the European pillar could be achieved. Severe shortcomings still include intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) capabilities, troop size, and mobility of forces, and not least the industrial capacity to sustain prolonged confrontations. 

The Commercial Industry Aspect

In addition to the exhibits, industry leaders also held presentations on the main stage. Reminiscent of short commercial breaks during which many participants left the room for a coffee, they presented their companies’ perspectives and proposed solutions to the changing European security environment. Dr. Peter Koerte, member of the Managing Board and Chief Technology and Strategy Officer at Siemens, even shared his perspective on European deterrence-planning by proposing the introduction of a joint European nuclear program, with tactical nuclear weapons to successfully deter Russian aggression. In the context, this proposal appeared rather misplaced, as the involvement of industry on this level of decision-making seems highly questionable. 

Europe and the Indopacific Intertwined

An insightful highlight was the keynote speech by H.E. Ambassador Francois Chihchung Wu, Taiwan’s Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs. Somewhat an outlier amid many European or at most Transatlantic speakers, he underlined Taiwan’s essential position in the chip ecosystem as the backbone of the digital world and hinted at the ever-closer intertwined Indopacific and European regions. The Deputy Minister reiterated vehemently that a war in Taiwan would be destructive to the entire world economy, and he consequently proposed closer cooperation with Europe, guided by transparency, trust, and democratic values. The Indopacific including Southeast Asia is one of the most dynamic regions in the world, and tensions in the South China Sea are of paramount importance. As exemplified by Deputy Minister Wu’s remarks, countries in the region are interested in cooperating on security policy, while the conference showed that in Berlin the focus appears to be on provincial European-Transatlantic issues. Nonetheless, speakers like Lieutenant General Remigijus Baltrėnas, Director General of the International Military Staff at NATO, seconded that Europe and the Indopacific must be increasingly thought together, not least due to ever-growing cooperation between Russia and China.  

Conclusion – From Plans to Practice

The Latin phrase “if you want peace, prepare for war” (Latin: “si vis pacem, para bellum”)—much quoted at the Berlin Security Conference 2025—, encapsulates the conference’s key message: Plan A must be pursued vigorously so that Plan B never comes into effect. Plan A is credible deterrence. Only Plan B is defense, and NATO is already prepared to deliver on the latter. However, to succeed with the preferred Plan A, Europe must adjust its “mindset,” as noted by Mikael Frisell, General Director of the Civil Contingencies Agency, Sweden, and get its ducks (or rather tanks) in order.