this is bbc news. we'll have the headlines and all the main news stories for you at the top of the hour, as newsday continues — straight after hardtalk. welcome to hardtalk, i'm stephen sackur. russia and ukraine have powerful ties of geography, history and energy. and when it comes to the geopolitics of the current crisis, energy is a key factor. ukraine has long profited from being the middleman for russian gas exports into europe.

moscow is in the business of changing that reality. my guest today is yuriy vitrenko, ceo of ukraine's biggest energy company, naftogaz. as kyiv and moscow face—off, where does the economic leverage lie? yuriy vitrenko, welcome to hardtalk. hello. what is it like trying to run one of ukraine's biggest, most important businesses in this current climate of crisis?

under current circumstances, of course, it's a very hot seat because i have to do a lot of geopolitics, and sometimes it looks like a military exercise, rather than just running a company, because we are on the front line. many of ukraine's key fossil fuel assets are in the donbas region. that, i imagine, is a profound problem in itself. also, you have this very complicated relationship with russia when it comes to transhipment of fossil fuels. on both those levels, i imagine business is extraordinarily difficult right now. yes, but what makes it even more difficult is that in 2014 they invaded ukraine, the russians invaded ukraine, they illegally occupied crimea and illegally occupied donbas. and since then, we have been living under these war circumstances. and of course, it doesn't help any business to do business in a country that is again inside this kind of war situation.

although it's a hybrid war, it's not a full—scale war, but of course it complicates our life and the lives of ukrainians. if it is vladimir putin's intention to keep ukraine unstable and keep its economy fragile, then he's winning, isn't he? if we look at the reality of life in your country today, inflation is rising, bond yields are soaring because your government is finding it hard to find people who want to invest in your country, and the overall climate for ongoing capital investment is, of course, extremely negative right now. that's all to putin's advantage, isn't it? at the same time, we are growing as an economy and we are successful in defending our country since 2014. so russia is one of the biggest military powers in the world, but we're successfully fighting against them. and, for example, from my personal experience, in 2014, they interrupted supplies

of gas to ukraine. we managed to find an alternative and not to be on our knees, as putin hoped for that. then they went to stockholm arbitration. it was the biggest commercial arbitration in the world. they were claiming in total about $100 billion from naftogaz — my company. it's roughly the size of the ukrainian gdp. we successfully managed not just to defend against these claims, but to win $5 billion and to make them pay. yes, i had to personally negotiate with putin and to explain why they need to pay. then, again, there were some lengthy negotiations with miller, but at the end of the day, we got our money, so what i'm saying that, despite all the difficulties, we are successful in defending our country. right. i mean, you'vejust described a relationship which, in a sense, proved dialogue can work. but here we are with the americans every single day telling us that they believe from their intelligence gathering satellite imagery

that russian forces on your borders are poised to attack and they say literally any day putin could press the button to launch a major offensive. do you personally think war is coming? a new level of war is coming to your country? erm, i live under this feeling that the war, the full—scale war, further invasion is possible for seven years. at the same time, we can't see that this threat is more imminent than, for example, it used to be in the past. at the same time... really? you don't feel it's more imminent today? because that is definitely not the message coming from washington and, indeed, london and other capitals. we remember some times in our recent history, a couple of years ago, a year ago, when there was a similar amassment of troops and there were similar risks of further invasion, but we know what to do. in order not to be further invaded, we have to be strong so that we don't look easily invadable. putin would not invade ukraine

if he understands that it won't be a walk in the park, if he understands that he cannot find the proper pretext. they have this habit of invading other countries but they always need a pretext for that. ukraine is the largest territory—wise country in europe. we have a0 million people. so it's very difficult to control such a country when the whole population is hostile against, for example, an invader. we proved it, for example, during the second world war. so, from that perspective, again, putin is fighting for some pretext. he wants ukraine first to become weaker and with all these economic difficulties that he inflicts on ukraine, he's trying to make ukraine difficult... ..erm, vulnerable, and our life basically more difficult. you are a close ally of president volodymyr zelensky in kyiv. he appointed you energy minister amid a whole host of criticism, and then shortly after appointed you as ceo of state—owned naftogaz. you're close with him.

are you prepared to tell me that he got putin wrong? because he said he could negotiate a lasting forever peace with vladimir putin when he was elected? 0ne clarification. he wanted to appoint me the first deputy prime minister and the minister of energy, but because of oligarchs controlling some parliament members, they voted against my candidacy, so i wasjust an acting energy minister. but, yes, again, iworked with the president, i lead the biggest company in ukraine, international company, and we are in the middle of the geopolitical battle, so, yes, i am close to the president. and he got putin wrong? answering to this particular question, it's important to understand that we might lack some military intelligence. again, for example, our international partners, the uk, the us, you are more advanced in terms of your capabilities to get this intelligence, but modern wars, not even modern, all wars... i'm not talking about whether or not it's right to say that war is imminent, i'm talking about the fundamental position that

zelensky sold to the ukrainian people that if they elected him to power, he would, categorically would, be able to make peace with putin. in fact, several years ago, he said to me, "stephen, if i do not deliver that peace deal that i have promised with putin, i will resign." we are a very long way from that peace. what i know and what i remember, that he tried his best and he had this good intentions to have this peaceful agreement with putin. maybe now he's frustrated. maybe now he comes to realisation about very different intentions of putin. and by the way, maybe biden administration is also coming to this realisation at the moment. i had experience with the previous president and i had personal experience in dealing with putin. that's why, unfortunately, we cannot expect some kind of reciprocity from putin's regime. it's not aboutjust having good intentions, it's not aboutjust craving peace, it's really about being able again to fight, to confront putin, so that there is peace. and from this perspective, what i see now, our president

fully realises that. he realises that ukraine needs to be strong in order not to let putin further invade ukraine. and the promises that he made to the ukrainian people, that ukraine, again, develops as a peaceful country, now rests on ukraine being strong enough to be able to confront putin. right. ukraine is not strong, though, is it? let us look at the realities of ukraine's position, particularly in energy, which is, of course, your sector. you say that russia is blatantly — and this is your phrase — using gas as a weapon. but the truth is, russia holds the cards when it comes to this question of energy supplies and gas distribution, because ukraine, for years, has become dependent on the income that comes from being the servicer of russia's gas exports to europe. even today, you still get billions of dollars —

at least $2 billion a year — from transhipment fees. you haven't weaned yourself off that — you should have done, and now you're vulnerable. i think i have a rather differentjob. i will explain what i mean. so, before i came back to naftogaz in 2014, ukraine naftogaz, my company, was paying on average $5 billion more for russian gas supplies then we were getting for transit. so money was going from ukraine to russia. what we changed, what my team changed at naftogaz, is that, yes, again, we made russia pay more for transit, and, again, we started using gas more efficiently, so we decrease imports of gas three times. and, yes, since 2015, we are getting more money for transit than we are paying for the whole imported gas. at least it was the case before... but now... i'm talking about what is happening right now. right now, russia has the ability to bypass ukraine. it has the turkstream option, it has nord stream 1, and we imagine it will very soon have nord stream 2,

because that pipeline under the baltic sea has been built. the only issue is when it becomes operational. ukraine is being bypassed. that is the strategic reality. but... ..ourjob is to make that russia cannot bypass ukraine, and although this pipeline, nord stream 2, is finished, in terms of construction, it's not operating. and, again, we're successfully fighting against the certification of this pipeline because it's not compliant with european rules. but here, the security dimension is more important than the economic dimension, here in this particular question, because it's ourfirm belief, based on our experience, that the reason, first and foremost, putin wants to build nord stream 2 is to be able to divert transit from ukraine to nord stream 2 to, as you say, bypass ukraine, because he wants to be able to further invade ukraine without any negative consequences on energy trade with europe and with

germany in particular. so that's a real concern, and that's what we're trying to explain to our partners all over the world. well, of course, the russians would absolutely deny that, that they have set out from the very beginning with the intent to invade ukraine. that's certainly not the message that comes from moscow. they say they're simply defending their security interests as nato projects its power ever closer to their border. but let's not get stuck on that, let's stay with the energy issue, because the truth is, nord stream 2 wasn't built in a day. it's been built over years, and you've been delivering this message, that it's a strategic danger to ukraine, to washington, to berlin, to all of the key capitals for years, and they have not been listening. that is the reality. we had some successes. so, under the previous administration, again, we managed to persuade the congress to impose some sanctions on nord stream 2... i know the story, but let us be real about where we are.

joe biden decided to lift all the remaining sanctions on the nord stream 2 project last year. let us also look at the germans. new chancellor 0laf scholz, even now, he can't find it within himself to guarantee that if the russians invade, he will block nord stream 2. what does that tell you about the attitude, for example, of the germans, toward a long—term relationship with russia and still dependence on their gas? yeah, it's difficult, otherwise, i would not be in this position. in this position of the ceo of naftogaz. but, again, we have some successes here as well. for example, finally, the biden administration acknowledges that with sanctions, it can stop nord stream 2, because before they were saying that even with sanctions they could not stop nord stream 2. now they realise that it can be stopped with the sanctions. again, with the new administration in germany, there are also some advances, especially with the greens and with the liberals. with spd, it's a bit more difficult, for obvious reasons, because they had some historic

connections with russia. and, sure, there is again the man behind nord stream 2. at the same time, 0laf scholz, again, the way he talks about nord stream 2, it gives us some optimism, in terms of them looking at it seriously. have you talked yourself to 0laf scholz? not yet. i talked to the previous chancellor, frau merkel. we had a dinner of four—and—a—half hours and at least for one hour and a half, were discussing nord stream 2. because i just wonder whether you believe that even now, in this moment of crisis, that the united states and the europeans are really on the same page when it comes to the message being given to vladimir putin, because whilejoe biden talks about the severest of sanctions which will utterly cripple the russian economy, we don't get the same message from the europeans. we've just had emmanuel macron in moscow, five hours of meetings with putin face—to—face, saying that he understands that moscow has some legitimate security

interests which nato needs to address. 0laf scholz, as i say, refuses to promise that he will abandon nord stream 2, even if the russians invade. do you think the united states and europe are on the same page? not exactly, because, unfortunately, many politicians inside europe, they favour this mentality of balance of powers and they sometimes look at russia first of all as some kind of power that they have to put up with. some of them are even afraid of russia as a power. people from eastern germany are openly saying that, "look, we had to live under this for decades, just hoping that at some point we will have our country back." at the same time, they also look at russia as some kind of counterbalance to the us, to the anglo—saxon world. and that's really wrong, basically, because it's not about using, again,

russia or china as a counterbalance to the us, it's really about looking at the right course, and if we are all defending the free world, the modern civilisation, from some autocratic regimes, we should not support autocratic regimes as a counterbalance to the leaders of the free world. but unfortunately, again, it is the case with some german politicians, and notjust german politicians. that's something we... i mean, let us be realistic about the european union. you can look at italy, you can look at hungary under viktor 0rban, you can look at various different governments inside the european union, whom it is very difficult to imagine taking the toughest of tough measures against vladimir putin just because they're told to do so byjoe biden. i would agree that it's complicated. we have to do a lot of work to unite european leaders to confront putin. and, from our personal experience, the only recipe for success is to be able

to confront him, to be strong. it's not about appeasing him, it's not about finding a compromise, resetting your relationship with russia. it's only about being strong, so that they feel and understand the strength. that's the only language that they understand. you have throughout this interview told me that the priority for ukraine today has to be strong. ukraine has to stand tough, hang tough against vladimir putin and his threats. the problem is — and you know it as you run state—owned naftogaz — that ukraine is deeply vulnerable, particularly on energy issues. you still need russian gas yourselves. you still need coal and oil. if it doesn't come from russia, it comes from, for example, central asia, which arguably is controlled by russia, and you have very difficult access to it if vladimir putin wants to block it. these arguably are all strategic mistakes that you and the politicians in ukraine have made over the last decade. when i came to naftogaz in 2014, we imported 30 billion

cubic metres of gas. now we import only ten, so we decreased our imports ten times. we stopped buying russian gas in 2015... the amount you still need is still rather important. yes, of course. again, we cannot do these, again, miracles, wonders, overnight. and the coal, the coal that you get, largely from territories which have very close relations with vladimir putin? now we are buying it from south africa and from the united states. what about the kazakh coal you needed and you couldn't get? we could not get it, so that's why we're not getting it, the russians blocked it. it's another example of the energy war they are waging against... that's my point. you are still vulnerable to the energy war. yes, we're still vulnerable, and that's why, again, we have to do this very difficultjob to become energy independent, to be stronger, because, of course, should we be as strong as we would like it to be, we would not be discussing now this military threat. they would not even dare to, again, scare the whole world with this full—scale war against ukraine. but it's a deeper issue than just saying to me,

"ah, well, you know, we're undergoing a transition and we will be stronger in energy terms as well as...", you know, "..strengthening ourselves in military terms. you've got a big cultural problem in ukraine. you are, according to all of the independent analysis, a country that is ravaged by endemic corruption, which goes to the very heart of government and your corporate life, and that isn't changing. that weakens your country terribly, doesn't it? it is changing. in 2014, again, when i came back to naftogaz, it was the biggest source of corruption in ukraine, and this corruption was based on imports of russian gas. again, these big oligarchs, the most corrupt people in ukraine, got their power from this import of russian gas. there were some swiss companies as middle men. they were buying tv channels, again, plants and everything. we stopped it in 2014, so i can share my personal experience of how we fight corruption.

with respect, your very career is symbolic of the fact that things are not changing. you were appointed energy minister, acting energy minister, because the parliament actually refused to rubber stamp your appointment. no, because oligarchy groups, first group controlled by kolomoyskyi, a notorious oligarch, another group controlled by akhmetov. that's. .. that's your version of events. the other thing about your career of late is that having done that acting job for a while, zelensky then wanted to put you in as head of naftogaz, so he kicked out the guy who was head of naftogaz, who, according to all of the independent analysis, was doing a very good job. to quote the former us ambassador to ukraine, mr kobolyev, who was doing the job, "was as clean as they come. he was fearless in pursuit of reform." that from the us ambassador. but he was turfed out because zelensky wanted you, his great mate, to take over naftogaz. what does that tell us about corporate culture in ukraine?

this quote of the us ambassador, marie yovanovitch, was made in 2017 or �*18, when i was number two at naftogaz. i was the executive director of naftogaz. so did you share her assessment that your boss, who was then turfed out by zelensky, was as clean as they come and fearless in pursuit of reform? at that time, again, the person that you are mentioning was my boss. i was in charge of all the important reforms. the fight against gazprom corruption, stockholm arbitration, and he was my boss. and when he was fired by the government, for a very obvious reason, naftogaz, unfortunately, became loss—making. so, when i left naftogaz in the first quarter of 2020, immediately naftogaz became loss—making. and as you mentioned yourself, it's the biggest taxpayer in the biggest country, in ukraine, so it was very important for the government... as i understand it, mr kobolyev had been running naftogaz for years, so to blame him for one underperformance, which of course was related to the global economy, it wasn't entirely down to him,

seems a little bit unfair, and many ukrainian... what is unfair? ..politicians who are known to be keen on transparency and reform... i'm thinking now of former prime minister honcharuk, he said that your appointment to naftogaz was all about zelensky. .. and this is a quote, "zelensky and his team exercising total control." so, i was in charge of very important initiatives that made naftogaz profitable. i left naftogaz, naftogaz became loss—making, as confirmed by international auditors. production started to decrease again, production of natural gas. as you mentioned yourself, it's a source of ukrainian energy independence. so it was obvious that the government was unhappy with that. that's why they asked me to get back to naftogaz. and when i returned to naftogaz in 2021, naftogaz became profitable, as confirmed by international auditors. starting from december, we

started growing gas production. we, for example, filed a complaint to dg competition about abuse of gazprom that the previous management failed to... there is a dispute about naftogaz�*s past performance and its current performance. let me end byjust asking you a very broad question which i think gets to the nub of the current problem. do you recognise that ukraine, in the end, because of all of its ties that we've discussed — energy, economy, geography, all of its ties to russia — will have to find a way of compromising with moscow, and that may mean that you have to compromise on some of yourambitions, likejoining nato and the european union? we have to become a successful, prosperous, strong country. we have to do necessary reforms so that we don't depend on russia. and that's the key for peace. what about that word compromise? i don't like this word, especially under these circumstances, with a gun at our head.

again, it's not about such compromises because such compromises, to some extent, it's almost like betrayal, basically. so it's not about finding a compromise, it's finding a fair solution for the people of ukraine and for the free world. because it all started when ukrainians, in 2014, went on maidan to declare our european choice — that we want not to be with this corrupt russian world but we want to be with europe, with the west, with the modern civilisation. and that's what we have to defend — our european choice, so there are no compromises around that. yuriy vitrenko, i wish we could continue but we're out of time. i thank you very much indeed forjoining me on hardtalk. thank you.

hello there. a very powerfuljet across the atlantic will pick up areas of low pressure and deepen them into storms later this week. notjust one named storm, but two are heading our way. before this very windy weather arrives, we'll find some spells of rain, again, coming infrom the atlantic, you can see all that cloud that's pushing in from the west. and, after a wet start in scotland in the morning, we'll see that rain pushing up toward the northern isles. we've got this rain pushing its way towards southeastern parts of england, where it could stay a bit wet into the afternoon. but away from here, many places will brighten up — there'll be some sunshine, a few showers, mainly in scotland, where they could be a bit wintry in the hills. it will be a slightly cooler day here, but again, elsewhere, we'll find temperatures up to 9—10 celsius. it does cloud over in the afternoon in northern ireland, and that cloud will continue to thicken into the evening.

rain soon arriving, and that rain will push its way quickly eastwards overnight. could be a bit more snow perhaps over higher parts of northern scotland, it'll still be quite cold here, but elsewhere it should be fairly mild, the rain having cleared away by wednesday morning. but it's only a brief respite because we'll find more rain coming in from the atlantic, mainly affecting northern and western areas of the uk. and ahead of that rain, it'll be extremely mild on wednesday across more southeastern parts of the uk, temperatures at 17 celsius. but the winds will be strengthening through the day, and they will continue to strengthen as we head into the evening and overnight — that's because storm dudley is arriving, it races to the north of scotland with the strongest winds to the south of the storm itself. and, whilst it'll get very windy in most areas, this is where the core of strongest winds is expected to be. this is where we have this amber wind warning from the met office — gusts of 80mph or so could bring some damage and some disruption, as well. the winds do gradually ease during thursday as the storm races away. we've got a few showers and some sunshine, some wetter

weather in scotland, a mixture of rain and some snow to higher levels, as well. temperatures around 6—7 celsius here, highs of 12 in the south east of england. things get windier, though, as we head towards the end of the week. the next named storm — this is storm eunice — this area of low pressure will deepen. there's still a lot of uncertainty about the track, but it'll bring some very windy weather to much of the country, particularly so across england and wales. and further north in the colder air, particularly in scotland, there's likely to be some snow and some blizzards.

welcome to newsday, reporting live from singapore, i'm karishma vaswani. the headlines. western officials say russia has mobilised enough troops to be able to invade ukraine at "the drop of a hat" — ukraine's president remains defiant. translation: they tell us that february the 16th will be - the day of the invasion. we will make this into unity day. so, what's motivating the kremlin, and what do ordinary russians think? we'll go to moscow to find out. in a phone call president biden and borisjohnson said a window for talks remained open — also in the programme. canada's prime minister invokes rarely used emergency powers in an attempt to end the ongoing protests against covid measures.

a month since the devastating volcanic eruption and tsunami