as having separated from the south and rocket, the drag and capsule should reach these by station on set up at the field. that will return. that's open now coming up next especially to be with finance. yes, bill brought up on using frozen russian assets for rebuilding your crime. i'm at howard in the lane. i'll be back in 45 minutes with another bullet and stay with the can you see what old con tires have to do with the production? here's a hands on the real media watch now on youtube, the, the ukraine says it can't wait for the war to stop to stop rebuilding it's country

and it's not waiting, but funds are drawing up. that's why it's trying to drum up support not only the full weapons deliveries here with the world economic forum and dumble switzerland, but also reconstruction 8. the american born british financier and political active as bill brown was once behind the largest foreign investment portfolio in russia. i asked him to what extent frozen russian central bank assets could be used to rebuild the ukraine? we're in a kind of a crucial moment right now where ukraine is running out of ammunition. ukraine is running out of resources. the west, who had been promised to stay as long as it took are now hesitating. we've seen gary ends block. uh you funds $50000000000.00. we you funds. we've seen some small group of far. right. republicans block us funds. and so this is really, really more a question of how does ukraine, when the war and what funds do they need during the war?

and so i would say that that the frozen russian assets should be used for defense 1st. and what's the worst over then? we can talk about reconstruction. what sort of sounds are we talking about here? first of all, hundreds of billions. well, nobody knows for sure there's a lack of transparency um, many countries aren't fully disclosing. but we're looking at somewhere between $3350000000000.00 of russian central bank reserves in the west and united states in the u. k. and the u and various other places. and it raises a lot of questions. first of all, because each country has their own decisions to make about confiscating this money . but it's, it's clear from both a, a financial and moral standpoint that russia should pay for the damage they've done . how can it be confiscated, that as well. the money has been frozen, which is the 1st thing and, and if you had asked me, let's say 3 years ago before the oldest happened with the u. freeze russian central

bank reserves. i would have told you there's no way that there's a, there's no way that there's a political will to do that. and they froze that money. now, now the money needs to be confiscated. there are many people saying, well what, what is that gonna do is increase on certainty. and what about the sovereign immunity of russian money, etc? and my argument is that, that russia has so broken the international rule book by invading ukraine. that one can make clear legal argument to confiscate this money. and most importantly, the money, you know, see, they're going to come out of our pocket. or it's gonna come out of the russians pocket and put in should pay before we pay for his war. what could happen worst case scenario when it comes to financial stability? and so i thing of so much money all the months. well the, the fear monitors say that if, if this happens, if this money is confiscated, then everyone will abandon the euro and the dollar. and the sterling and the swiss francs. why?

because they'll think that these are not saved currencies, but then where are they going to put their money or they're going to put their money in, in the china, in china, or in saudi arabia. i mean it's, it's kind of an absurd arguments and efforts are narrow minded argument to say that people aren't going to own the us dollar or the euro because of this. yeah, i'm sure if you're about to invade a neighbor and cause hundreds of billions of dollars of damage, you might not be keeping your money in yours and dollars. but i think that for the most part it doesn't have any effect on financial stability. and what's interesting is that the people who are for saying this are politicians, not finance here as i, i've been in the financial markets for my whole life. and i can tell you that that to the dollar and the euro will continue to be reserved currencies after this is done. or some people are saying this would set a dangerous precedent. it is on childhood to our trade, but wouldn't it be setting a very, or sending a very strong signal to russia to others about starting was indeed this is,

this was the, the main unexpected consequence of doing this is very well act as a, a massive deterrent on china, i'm going into tie want, if you have a um, a country with a lot of foreign exchange reserves and a, a mission to do something terrible. they may say, well, you know, these foreign exchange reserves that we have are probably more valuable to us. then whatever that's um, uh, aggressive plan we have to invade a foreign country and so i would say that that's um, yes, a sense of precedent, which is that if you invade your neighbors, you're not gonna get to keep your money. in the meantime, the debate is hot between the various countries. in the european union, germany, italy, belgium, france, worried about just channeling the profits made from these frozen assets that they are holding at the moment, which in some cases amount to some 3000000000 euros i believe was this is a really interesting thing. so the, the european union has gotten their head around the idea of taking some of russia's

money, confiscating some of these reserves. and so the moment you confiscate one percent, or 3 percent or whatever percent it is and you want to confiscate. and you've already crossed the rubicon. why confiscate 2 percent when you can confiscate a 100 percent? ukraine needs the money rush. it has done the damage and you've already crossed the line. it just seems like kind of a baby step is on necessary when, when it is clear to me that in some period of time the political will would be there to confiscate all the money. what about the legalities of all of this? can you bring us up to speed on what's right, what's wrong here? well, so the, the russian government will be screaming bloody murder and they're saying this is a violation of law. this is money that belongs to the sovereign state of russia. this money is protected by sovereign immunity, which is like your embassy, you can't be touched. the western lawyers are going to make the argument that's um, there is something called the law and counter measures. if you invade

a foreign country and you create a $300400000000000.00, a trillion dollars worth of damage is that you owe those damages to the country you've invaded. and there's many situations in, in, in the world where there are conflicts of laws. this is one where it's pretty clear that the, the conflict of lot of the sovereign immunity is trumped by the law and counter measures. and that's the, the argument that the lawyers will make. what about the threat is coming from russia? then the threats of tit for tat reprisals when it comes to seizing of assets is russia in, in, in a position to seize assets of any type? well, it's not as if the u. s. federal reserve is keeping their roubles. yeah. and in the russian central bank, so i don't think that that's gonna happen. but we're here in davos and i was just, i'm having a dinner on monday night. and, and one of the attendees was a senior executive from the hon di company in korea. and they had

a $3000000000.00 investment in, in, in car manufacturing in st. petersburg. and they were forced to sell it for a $114.00 back to the russian some, some russian. and so the expropriation on the private sector side has already happened, is that, as i like um, western corporate assets are now at risk. they, they, they, they, they, they, they either been liquidated voluntarily by, by these western companies, or they're being expropriated by the russian government. now, even before this happens. and so i would say that that's a, a sort of red herring that, that, that shouldn't be standing out there. what else could russia do? they can huff and they can pause and they can scream bloody murder as they will. and that will be that and, and for what it's worth, you know, this is also not just to help you crane, but this is a way of punishing pu um we need to punish him for what he's done. he needs to pay up a deer price. he, his people need to see that this is what happens when you do something so full

hardy as invade and murder, your neighboring country, your kremlin critic but your also were a huge investor in russia. how would you feel, seeing all of those assets, all that money suddenly being shifted out of russia to you? great. i think it's i would read a huge sigh of relief. i think it would be the morally right thing to do. the ukraine is desperate to stand up on their own 2 feet. and before we start sending our money from the west port and should pay for the for the war, he cost and he should and ukrainians who gets put is money to fight back. and that seems like, you know, the only good, honest thing to do in the end is interesting when i talk about this publicly, when i talk about it on twitter and the responses unanimous, that this is the right thing to do. and people in the west can't understand why it hasn't been done yet. or how much money does ukraine need when it comes through reconstruction? i've been reading around 400000000000 euros enough with either the numbers i've

read or, well, well, north of 400000000000. i've, i've seen numbers as high as a trillion, and it all depends on how you measure the damage and, and what kind of reconstruction needs to be done. but we're talking about infrastructure, we're talking about electricity grids, housing, hospitals, etc. i mean, you can look at the pictures of, of moria, paul and boucher and they've been level to the ground. and, and by the way, this doesn't even take into account the, you know, the, the, the, the loss of life, the, the, the complete destruction of humanity that's happened there. there's just untold damage that needs to be compensated. and, and there's, i mean, you know, that the, the damn, that was, was blown out by the russians. i mean, it's just goes on and on and on. and so it's almost one imaginable. what, what the russians have done in ukraine, because that's what they do. they do a scorched earth, total destruction strategy, and it's not just and ukraine. they did that in chechnya, they did that in various places in georgia that this,

this suited syria. this is what the russians do, that they don't really know how to build. they know how to destroy, and in this case, not just a damn, also a nuclear power plant and, and on and on and on. and it's, you know, and we're not anywhere near done with this war. the, you know, food and has made it clear he's carrying on. and so whatever the measurement of damage is, is that's just an interim measure and the damages are going to get worse there. every day there's missile attacks from russia and to ukraine. so do you see problems in investing and reconstruction at the same time as a war continues? it seems to me that this war needs to be one. ukraine needs the money to win the war, and that's going to be the, the 1st and only priority. and then we talked about reconstruction. would you put your money in your credit right now? i'd wait until the war is over and that's not what you create needs. it says it needs that money. now to start rebuilding now i was just mentioning the electricity grids, the housing problem. i mean, how does life go one uh, close to the close to the front lines of oh, well, most importantly,

the training and citizens who are there need heating. they need electricity. they need hot water. they need, you know, the function on a day to day basis. but i think it's right now, duct tape and whatever, you know, told that temporary measures keep everything going while we try to get this war one . and it wasn't that aid more, more than anything is weapons, you know, serious weapons to expel russia from their territory. but why your caution or hesitancy is it because you'd like to see public funds not private funds, 1st of all put in or, or does it require a joint ethic? well, at, at this stage of the game and in private investors, you know, we're looking at risk and looking at return. and how do you measure the risk of a bomb comes in and destroys everything you might have built. and so at this stage of the game, this is, this is all about. and so in my mind about defense, the reality is people here in davos invest as private investors here in douglas of those going to be located, looking at the return on investment,

the risks involved. uh, is that where the states need to step up? yeah. when, when, when the private sector doesn't work, that's when the public sector needs to step in. and this is a situation where and for this arrival of ukraine, they need public funds and, and the west has been in europe in united states and u. k. of been some providing funds and they need to continue to provide funds, but it shouldn't just be the tax payers or are countries that provide those funds. the argument then, as far as the us goes to u. k is stepping up funding to try to fill that gap the you is trying as well. um, how would you convince american politicians here to continue that support? well, i think that most american policy, since that i know, and i know a lot of them are fully on the side of ukraine and it's, it's not, it's not a um, i don't think it's a long term issue. right. the 2nd, i think that, that congress will find a way to, to provide us congress will provide a way to, to provide that the 63 some odd 1000000000 that has been promised this year. and

the big, the elephant in the room is what happens when there's a new president in november of this year. they'll be a u. s. presidential election. president trump or say former president trump. is the front runner right now. he said that he will in the war and one day what he means by that is because he will stop funding ukraine. and if that happens, then does europe have the resources to step up? and by the way, comes back to the present restroom reserves. i might even describe them as donald trump insurance. explain why, what, how, how that would work? well basically if, if i'm donald trump is going to cut off ukraine from funding. and ukraine needs the funds. there's one big pile of money right there, which is these russian central bank reserves of $300.00, something plus $1000000000.00 that could be drawn on to fill the gap that donald

trump will leave you a route, a pleasure talking to fantastic. thank you for breaking down the numbers for us on a very complex, complicated issue. thank you. the most female founder's main priority isn't becoming exceedingly wealthy. sure. there are famous entrepreneurs that have made billions creating dating platforms or begin cosmetic brands. but most one to combat social issues, reducing plastic waste, providing care services, and creating social support systems. let us introduce you to a young start of founder from germany was making the everyday lives of women safer . find out more today on made the the use business magazine

walking down.