On 17–18 November, Cugir will host the conference dedicated to the UNESCO Global Network of Learning Cities, an international initiative promoting lifelong learning and sustainable urban development.

Cugir joined the network in 2024, becoming part of a global framework connecting cities committed to implementing educational, social, and economic strategies aligned with UNESCO principles.

The network, coordinated by the UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning (UIL), supports intercity cooperation through best-practice exchange, applied research, and integrated policy development.

The event will bring together national and international guests, including experts in education, research, urban development, and public policy, as well as representatives from UNESCO Learning Cities.

The conference contributes to strengthening Cugir’s participation in the global network and supports the development of an academic and international cooperation framework dedicated to urban learning policies.

During his first official visit to Bucharest as NATO Secretary General, Mark Rutte reaffirmed in an exclusive interview with CaleaEuropeană.ro the United States’ and NATO’s full commitment to Romania and the Eastern flank, dismissing any speculation about a “decoupling” between Europe and the US for the European security amid American reduction of forces in Romania.

“The US is completely invested in NATO, completely invested in Romania. You have seen President Trump at The Hague Summit. (…) This has absolutely nothing to do with this country. You are a highly valued NATO ally,” Rutte said.

The NATO chief also emphasized the importance of continued support for Ukraine, warning that any reduction in that support would directly increase the threat to Romania and to the Alliance as a whole.

“If Ukraine were not supported, the threat to Romania would be much greater“, he added, suggesting that in this case Romania and its allies would have to do much more for defense.

“When we talk about NATO, we talk about Romania. When we talk about Romania, we talk about NATO. It’s one and the same thing“, he added, noting that the threat to Romania and NATO would be one and the same.

Rutte added that the Alliance is adapting to the new security realities by integrating the defence of the Eastern Flank within the new “Eastern Sentry” concept, which starts in the Black Sea and stretches to the High North.

“The Black Sea is of vital strategic importance to NATO. What Romania is doing to keep it safe and free is crucial,” he stated.

The NATO Secretary General also thanked Romania for its support to the Republic of Moldova, stressing that he shares the “sense of urgency” expressed by President Nicușor Dan regarding hybrid threats from Russia.

 

CaleaEuropeană.ro: Mr. Secretary General of NATO, Mark Rutte, welcome to Romania on your first visit here as NATO’s top official and especially welcome on Calea Europeană!

Mark Rutte: Thank you to have me on the platform.

CaleaEuropeană.ro: Mr. Secretary General, your visit coincides with Washington’s announcement about repositioning rotational U.S. forces in Romania. How should Romanians, a people with high confidence both in NATO and our bilateral Strategic Partnership with the US, perceive this decision?

Mark Rutte: Well, let me be very explicit. The Americans have a big presence in Europe. What they are constantly doing is adjusting their presence, making sure that they make the best use of their troops in Europe, and they took this decision. This has nothing to do with Romania, nothing to do with NATO or their commitment. It has to do with the fact that they want to make sure that they make maximum use of their resources. And Romania is extremely well protected by your own armed forces, by the foreign land force, but of course also by the fact that we have this deal in NATO, which is that if you got to be attacked, we will collectively come to the rescue. And that is all staying there. 

CaleaEuropeană.ro: Can you confirm whether other NATO allies, since the NATO battlegroup in Romania led by France will be scaled up to a brigade, will compensate for this US adjustment in Romania?

Mark Rutte: This is an adjustment because they came to the conclusion that they can make better use of those troops in another way. We have this Eastern Sentry activity, which starts in the Black Sea and ends in the High North, which is integrating everything we do to protect our Eastern Flank. If in that context you would, whenever, wherever, more troops or whatever resources in Romania, they will be there.

CaleaEuropeană.ro: Either European or American?

Mark Rutte: Yeah. I mean, of course, the whole of NATO is collectively defending the Eastern flank. And that means that it’s never this one flag on the mission, it’s always the collective NATO endeavour. But always starting, of course, with your own Romanian Armed Forces. And that’s why I’m so happy that Romania is really investing in this collective defence itself.

CaleaEuropeană.ro: The reason why we are insisting on this topic is that in the Eastern part of NATO there is a sensitivity or fear of Europe decoupling from the US or vice versa. Do you feel that this US troops reduction will shift Romania from a balanced US – European military footprint to a more European one?

Mark Rutte: Can I please again tell you, you are looking, you are really reading too much into this. The US is completely invested in NATO, it’s completely invested in Romania. You have seen President Trump at the The Hague Summit. He had only one irritant with NATO, and rightly so. And that was the fact that we in Europe were not paying the same as the Americans are paying. And this is a problem since Eisenhower was President in the US. This US President has been able to correct that. With the NATO Summit in The Hague, Europeans, including Romania, have decided we will pay the same as the Americans, not only because we want to equalise with the US, but because we need it for our own collective defence, because of the staggering Russian military build-up over the last couple of years, still continuing. So, the US is completely invested in NATO, completely invested in Romania. This is the normal day-to-day job of every nation to make sure that you make maximum use of your troops. They came to the conclusion, we can better adjust a little bit like they did. Absolutely nothing to do with this country. You are highly valued, because you punch above your weight. You are active all over NATO territory. You are a highly valued NATO ally. And this is not me saying this. I hear this from every corner in NATO that they respect Romania.

CaleaEuropeană.ro: In his recent memoir, your predecessor Jens Stoltenberg, talks about the fiery summit in 2018 when you played a role in calming US President Donald Trump. Also, one of the qualities that portrayed you on top for the NATO race is being “Trump’s whisperer”. Is it hard to win Donald Trump’s heart and mind?

Mark Rutte: Nobody is a whisperer. Not for you, for me, for President Trump. Let’s stay with the facts. What he did when he was in his first presidency, in Trump 45, he said to the Europeans, you committed to 2%. It was this famous Welsh pledge. But you are not doing it. So what we saw in 2018, that indeed, over some time since he became President in 2017, you saw a sort of uptake in European defence spending. But that is small stuff compared to what is happening now with Trump 47. Because now we will move to 3.5%. The Germans, for example, when you compare 2021 with 2029, they will add another 100 billion euros, which is another 115 billion dollars each year to their defence spending. Yes, this is because of the Russian threat, but also because the Americans rightly have told us, hey, we want to stay involved, we want to stay engaged, but you have to equalise your spending with what we are spending. And we did. This was The Hague Summit. I still think that was one of the biggest foreign policy successes for President Trump. So he doesn’t need a whisperer. The facts are there. He is delivering, and we are with him.

CaleaEuropeană.ro: Thank you. Moving now to Romania, because you mentioned the important role that we have in the Alliance… We know that Romania has become central to NATO’s presence in the Black Sea, and there is no secret that Romania pushes forward for a more important role of the Black Sea region in NATO, especially since Russia’s full-scale invasion in Ukraine. But NATO officials are often asked about the difference of a more articulated Allied presence in the Baltic region and a lower one in the Black Sea. How do we counter this? 

Mark Rutte:  There is no talk of this. Maybe someday you will always have gossip. You are a journalist. When you go to the EU or to NATO, you always have the chattering classes discussing this. But this is not what is happening in real life. The fact that we are now integrating the defence of the Eastern Flank within this Eastern Sentry activity, it is starting in the Black Sea. Why? Because the Black Sea is of vital strategic importance to NATO. What you are doing, what Turkiye is doing, what others are doing to keep the Black Sea safe and free is crucial. But, of course, we also have to defend the High North, so the whole of the Eastern Flank is crucial. And the great thing with this new activity, Eastern Sentry, is that we combine all these activities. That’s one. So we are more flexible. We can, as I said before, we can scale up and do more in Romania or wherever and whenever is needed. But also, when it comes to the new technologies, we know the drones, having entered NATO airspace over the last couple of weeks again. Were very reckless, even if it was not intentional. It was at least reckless and unacceptable. But to build our own anti-drone technologies it will be part of this platform. So that we can speed up, scale up what we do in terms of countering these drone activities. One type of project like this is the Eastern Sentry.

CaleaEuropeană.ro: And with this Eastern Sentry project that somehow started as a Baltic Sentry, do you see the Black Sea moving towards a more permanent or NATO maritime coordination framework also for drones, anti-drones, air drones, naval drones and so on? 

Mark Rutte: The Baltic Sentry is specific for the Baltic. It is there because of the hybrid threats, cutting of other CC cables, etc. That’s why we launched on the 5th of January this year, 10 days after the latest incident between Finland and Estonia on the 25th of December, we launched the Baltic Sentry. That’s specifically for the Baltic Sea. But when it comes to Eastern Sentry, this is integrating all the defence of the Eastern Flank in terms of air and whatever you need. As I said, starting in the Black Sea and ending, and if necessary, beyond. But I don’t think there is a beyond to High North. So it is from the Black Sea and to the High North. Yes, making it more flexible, integrating everything we are doing, but also, indeed to your point, making sure that we can implement the latest technologies, particularly when it comes to hybrid, drones, etc. Learning from Ukrainians, taking lessons from what is now happening in Denmark a couple of weeks ago, Belgians are at the moment also struggling with drones above their airports. We are working together as NATO countries to support, but also to learn, so that we become better and better in comforting them. 

CaleaEuropeană.ro:  You opened here in Bucharest together with President Nicușor Dan the NATO Industry Forum. You’ve put ramping up military production and meeting capability targets at the core of your mandate. Taking a quantum leap, you said. But which one is more pressing:p utting the industry on the wheels of delivering capabilities for allies, support for Ukraine as it heads into another winter of war, or the prospect of Russia testing NATO’s agility and maybe Article 5? 

Mark Rutte: When it comes to Ukraine, this is a specific point I wanted to make for your viewers, if you allow me. I know there is a debate in every country, also in Romania, should we keep on supporting Ukraine. Please understand, if Ukraine would not be supported, the threat to Romania would be so much bigger than with Ukrainians staying in the fight.

CaleaEuropeană.ro: And for NATO as well.

Mark Rutte: Yeah, but Romania is NATO, NATO, Romania. There is no difference. When you talk about NATO, you talk about Romania. When you talk about Romania, you talk about NATO. It is, as you see here, the Romanian flag, NATO, it’s all the same. And we have to make sure that the Ukrainians will stay, not only because of our values, because this is a direct security threat to Romania, to the whole of NATO, if they would not stay in the fight, if they would not sustain. And forget that you can then spend 3.5 percent on defense. And thank you, Romania, for doing it, even before 2035. But then you would have to move to 5, 6, 7 percent defense spending. It would have massive impacts on our societies if that happens. Because the Russians would then be emboldened and so much stronger. We have to ramp up defense production, absolutely, because it’s an integral part of our deterrent defense. But also, we have to make sure that Ukraine stays as strong as possible in the fight.

CaleaEuropeană.ro: Exactly one year ago Romania’s democracy has been under pressure by a sophisticated campaign targeting our presidential elections. When referring to Russia’s destabilising activities in Romania, President Nicușor Dan quotes the North Atlantic Council Statement condemning Moscow’s malicious cyber activities in Romania and he believes that when it comes to hybrid warfare we are one step behind Russia. How can we turn this tide?

Mark Rutte: I’m not sure we are one step behind. I’m not sure I completely would subscribe to what he says about that if you quote him correctly. But I do, I do of course concur with his sense of urgency, which is part of that statement by the President. But I can assure you that the whole of NATO, including Romania, we are all very much aware of the hybrid threat. It has many faces. It is multifaceted. We cannot always talk about it in public, what we are doing to counter it, to make sure others will not try again. But it is an integral part of our defense. Let me be very clear about this and we have seen also in the recent Moldovan elections. And thank you again to Romania for everything you do for Moldova. It’s crucial. How important it is that elections are as free as possible.

CaleaEuropeană.ro: Thank you very much, Mr. NATO Secretary General.

Mark Rutte:  Thank you very much. Thank you.

By Dan Cărbunaru

The manipulations and disinformation eroding Western society are casting us adrift, into a drift that democracy seems poised to internalize, replacing the dynamics of civic engagement. In other words, precisely the bond without which the elected and the elector can remain connected only through the resigned necessity of maintaining appearances

For years, legitimate criticisms of the imperfections of the democratic system have been assembled and woven into narratives of hostile hybrid techniques, in which psychological influence methods have already led to the shaping of a veritable cognitive war.

Ideological narratives have succeeded in convincing an increasing number of Western citizens that democracy is corrupt, while simultaneously favoring the far right, after conservatives shifted toward the center.

While leaders prepare for the ever more probable confrontation with Russia, citizens’ readiness to defend democratic rights seems far behind their preparedness to defend their own territory.

Strengthening the mass media, education, and critical thinking are frequently on the lips of theorists and, at times, politicians, yet the results are slow to appear. Meanwhile, disinformation continues, growing ever more sophisticated, and exposure to conspiracy theories and manipulations deepens levels of mistrust, confusion, and disengagement.

Beyond this baseline, propaganda begins to bear fruit, influencing the population to act—for example, steering not only their perception but also their vote in a particular direction.

Although disinformation is easier to carry out, it is only a first stage. After values are relativized and citizens disoriented, opinions are then channeled toward action.

With a population increasingly disconnected from leaders they no longer identify with, leaders who have been subjected to a campaign of discrediting, an attack on elites becomes, in turn, an attack on those different from oneself as an individual.

How can one distinguish truth from falsehood, defend the Constitution, and yet not undermine democracy?

Today, we see ever more clearly how the Russians use weapons from the hybrid warfare arsenal, tools we either do not know well enough or do not fully understand, while simultaneously threatening with the military arsenal we are familiar with.

Drones, aircraft, ballistic missiles, launched alongside narratives that twist the minds of audiences—first-generation weapons.

After the failure to conquer Ukraine in three days, it took more than a year to fabricate justifications for horrors unseen since World War II. Then, after crafting messages to justify the crimes, the targeting of civilians, and the invasion, the messengers exploited the outcome of the U.S. elections. These gave them an opportunity to pose as pro-American by echoing certain ideas promoted by the victorious U.S. conservatives. And this is how Europe found itself antagonized—branded as progressive in contrast with the Democratic camp in the United States, and with the self-styled new conservative knights of the East.

And so, the battle between autocrats and democrats has intensified. Unfortunately, mercantilism has turned the confrontation of values into negotiation and barter. Somehow, in a sad irony, this mirrors the blindness of Europeans who continued doing business with the Russians even after the illegal annexation of Crimea. The shift from democracy to autocracy through mercantilism, and the legitimization of pro-Russian sentiment through conservatism, has allowed the ongoing relativization and blending of values, thereby making it even harder to grasp the fundamental stakes.

Meanwhile, the quality of the political class is declining, creating a problem that goes beyond the continuity of leadership in autocracies.

But in the end, why should citizens believe in democracy more than their leaders do? Leaders discredited by smear campaigns, by their own political battles, grounded in realities already known to the public. Under such conditions, the watchdog of democracy unintentionally amplifies the impact of hybrid campaigns—confirming corruption in the system, discrediting leaders, all against a backdrop of missing positive projects, of construction and hope.

What is happening at the level of European leadership? Leaders are isolated and divided, both from one another and from their citizens. We no longer have popular leaders who are not, at best, mere populists.

Meanwhile, those left behind, whether through lack of education, inadequate preparation, or any form of marginalization, feel abandoned in the midst of an economic and social transformation unfolding under the pressure of various challenges: inflation, structural shifts in the economy, digitalization, green policies, and migration.

What remains of the inclusive society, one that should not leave people abandoned in the course of progress?

How long can democracy withstand this cocktail of mistrust, fear and disengagement?

Populist leaders claim to be the only ones who know the solution, tolerating no challengers. Don’t get involved in politics, it’s for others. The discouragement of participation in the democratic game has strengthened an alternative in which extremists are rising in the polls, in votes won, and perhaps soon in power.

With citizens discouraged and disconnected from the stakes of functional democracy, and with states either unable or unwilling to manage the psychological warfare waged against society, are we left to await direct confrontation, a conventional war? Or will our democracies surrender, one by one, like the towers of a fortress collapsing from within?

The relativization of democracy and the drift toward autocracy demobilize the effort of defense. What are we defending? What sense does it make to defend a form of social organization portrayed as inefficient, immoral, and corrupt, ultimately not so different from autocracy? Does autocracy bring dialogue and peace? What kind of peace? One that redraws the moral map?

It is of little use that the Western economic model, the one that won the First Cold War, remains functional and unbeatable, or that technological progress and innovation continue to be powerful assets in global competition, if the social fabric is so vulnerable and so difficult to protect or regenerate through democratic means when faced with the instruments activated by autocracies.

Unfortunately, the vulnerabilities being exploited are rooted in mistakes and realities; they are not activated in an empty aquarium. 

And those who come to see the resolution of their real or imagined problems through means that weaken or even call into question democratic mechanisms become supporters of the very plan through which our democracies can be transformed into autocracies. The image of a Russia as savior, capable of delivering us from the dangers loudly painted across social media, as a liberator from oppressive elites, is a false representation of the real solutions Western societies need in order to regain balance.

It is true, hybrid warfare is nothing new. Nearly three millennia ago, Sun Tzu wrote that to fight and win all battles is not the ultimate excellence, but rather to subdue the enemy’s resistance without fighting. Cognitive warfare is what leads to surrender, to submission through fear.

Will we develop immunity in time? Will it be a herd immunity? A vaccine? Or will we ignore this immense existential challenge facing our democracies?