what is happening is a kind of joke for many countries and they know it. one sense about our stakes. we are talking about why the russian aggression has happening and putin is talking in his own way about the origins of the war. if you just want to have a break so fundamentally in some moment it would backfire and would require everyone for a lot or in translation would be a fire in the sense of total loss of freeman. none on parts thank yo, thank you so much.

the next question will discuss the ways if you want to have a copy thank you so much for our panel for driving us today. [applause] [applause]. this is about an hour. [background noises]

>> so, welcome and thank you for sticking around for a third panel today. i think we had a good segue from the last panel into the conversation on reconstructing ukraine. this is obviously session three council on foreign relations reconstructing ukraine as our symposium closes. i'm a senior fellow with the council on foreign relations i am delighted to have two of the leading thought leaders and experienced negotiators and basically my go to people in all things ukraine here in washington. this is on the record. i think we will do for the first 30 minutes or so is have a conversation amongst ourselves about literally what we need to do. how we need to think pragmatically.

what has been done? what is ongoing? there is minute reconstruction going on throughout one post 2022. with the plans are in the future and what still needs to be done. so introducing and natalie is the former finance minister of ukraine from 2014 until 2016. she is also the chair of the aspen institute and kyiv right now. he represents ukraine. done so since 2017 and represents the number of european countries deeply involved with the conversation around the official sector and private sector of the reconstruction section.

so we are not going to touch on the politics both of my guests today have some lines they are not going to stick into the question of reconstruction. starting with the fact the world bank together with the government of ukraine, the european commission and the un just released their updated figure of what it will likely cost to reconstruct ukraine. that number is $524 billion. that is for social infrastructure, schools, hospitals, energy, transportation, you name it. i want to emphasize the reason that $524 billion of reconstruction needs is because russia has destroyed 524 billion of ukraine's social and energy

and cultural infrastructure as well. so that is why we are here to talk about reconstructing ukraine. the levels set are optimistic. in a postwar situation it is rare that you have the talent and the opportunity, as ukraine is on the path towards eu integration. it has a lot of friends and a lot of support from the imf, world bank, eid, you have bilateral support, multiple different forums that have gathered in order to provide support for ukraine. i would like to provide a sense, i will start with you on levels set. what have we seen so far in

terms of support for ukraine in the midst of this horrible war that has been brought about by russia's 2022 invasion? >> thank you for organizing this event especially at this time. there have been a lot of things done in the last few years. the addition, a lot of that. so one of the major things is acceleration of the european union and what we see now is a brutal attack, started in 2004 when ukraine shows the european

union sector of development, decided to run away from the soviet union and what ukraine did in the last three years, remarkable in that this was the previous discussion. the second thing, the problem for ukraine now has been approved in march 2023, the first-ever program for the country which is an active war and the problem is on -- under the framework of what we have, fitting but the problem is working, just came back from kyiv where we reached a settlement agreement and the program is in the center of a lot of the different financial flaws to ukraine, the companies have other problems, it is not

so big by size, it is big, $60 billion but the total amount of money ukraine received, talking about the military and there's an important role in that. there are other institutions that did a lot in order, the money from the uk, japan, other countries, created a platform of 19 different dfis to investing ukraine, explain the role of the lead investor there, one of the biggest investors in ukraine and other source down, doing a great job

on ukraine but all of these together are a problem approved by the european union, all of these were done under the umbrella of the imf program but a lot has been done in terms of building infrastructure, the agency for reconstruction was created in ukraine, the imf program, we substantially grew the management framework for ukraine which is important for future investors and future economic treaty which general kellogg was saying is important to follow, to see the results of that. >> badly, can i ask you the same question, but try to give us a sense of what is left to be done in terms of preparing, hopefully, for period where we

have a reduction in hostilities and aggression against ukraine and an opportunity for a piece that can underpin ukrainian growth? >> thank you. i'm going to go back and give you a little color on those numbers we talked about so you all have a sense of the size of what we are dealing with. we saw the world bank number, the 524 is for only the war beginning with a full-scale invasion. i want everyone to understand it is more than that because this war has been going on for 11 years and we have no idea today in temporarily illegally occupied territory what kind of damage has occurred, we don't know the extent of the damage and what truly has been rebuilt. that number is an understatement to begin with.

second. i think it's important to note that the number increases daily, and yesterday they bombed a hotel with a ballistic missile, they promised to go from 150 drones to 500 a night and this is in light of the intelligence being shut off which you will see naturally increased activity. the last point i will say about this 524 giving a sense of how large it is, it's 2.8 times 2024 gdp of ukraine and it is estimated that that amount would be invested over 10 years. certainly it is important to note that this isn't about just when peace comes or there is a cessation of violence. as vlad said, construction has been going every day since the

first day and there are multiple reasons for that. one is pure need. when the russians blowup a dam you need to get water back to people in the southern part. other parts have to do with creating a sense of confidence among the people that we have the capability to build back, it was important to rebuild quickly to show people that we have that capacity. it is important to note that for ukraine it is important in terms of getting those refugees, 7 million or more, confident that there is going to be something to come home to. when you look at what has been done, the number one damage point and the number one rebuilding point has been housing and there is a reason it is housing. that is what i would describe. i agree that a great deal has been put in place in terms of structures.

ukraine has moved very far along in terms of creating public investment management system, producing something called the dream system which is a portal developed by civil society together with the government that has right now 10,000 or so projects, donors can use it to identify, if i want to work on hospitals, try to identify partners and it can be used for monitoring as these projects move forward. it is important to note that ukraine does this not only in line with their needs but also a couple other goals, that is reconstruction is supposed to also fit the commitments of reaching the eu and that's a difficult thing, you can well imagine rebuilding a road you but he did standards and rebuilding a road for emergency standards in ukraine are very different and very different costs.

not to mention the legal basis is not fully there to use eu standards and ukraine but that an element, i think ukraine is focused on inclusivity and sustainability so it's building back better, to the extent that we understand the society that we have today and will have tomorrow. private sector engagements, there's no way bilateral governments, international financial institutions will be able to of 4-door should be in position to afford that $524 billion, there should be a significant and substantial private sector contribution. i think the challenge for ukraine today is in keeping people aware that we need to do this now, not to wage. it doesn't have to be the cessation of violence. there may be areas you want to avoid that are on the front lines, there are many things that can be done today,

restoring medical, putting bunkers into schools, there are things that need to be done today and can be done. the donor platforms and systems that have been put in place to some extent are all we are going to get in terms of systems and institutions but i think ukraine is prepared for that both with its internal recovery agency and its strategic investment counsel, the work they are doing to create a single project pipeline, the challenge is not in institutions, the challenge is capacity. this should not be and it will not and cannot be a centralized system. it has to be decentralized, ukraine has a very decentralized governance system and that is why in that dream portal they are encouraged to bring projects and even if they are not at the top of the

central government's list, at the same time, the capacity at that local level is much much less then at the central level and i won't even say it is the central level, there is sufficient capacity. they are putting in two different centers, project preparation unit and project preparation facility. i can't tell you what the difference is but it won't be enough and there's a labor shortage in kiev right now and so the skill sets to do this, project management skill sets, all those things are in dire need, to move projects along you have to have more than a desire and an idea, you have to have feasibility studies, you have to do a lot more than just identify the problem. from my perspective the international community as they are, they are doing things now, doing them consistently. there's 7 to $10 billion of

work being done a year. i think the needs have been outlined at 14 to $17 billion a year so it comes a little bit short. i think the governments have done well in trying to provide more insurance for the private sector contribution so you've got a project, there are various ways to accelerate insurance available to private sector but right now what we need to do is increase ukraine's capacity and create the platform, create the environment that will get the private sector back in slowly until cessation. >> can i pick up on the important point of the private sector investment? the numbers are large and the opportunity is enormous because it goes far beyond critical

minerals and rare earths, the lithium, ukraine has enormous high-tech talent, cybertalent, mining and metallurgy trained workforce that is largely out fighting a war right now but he also has the leading edge of defense technology and they are building this whole valley with the cutting edge of where the future of warfare is and the overlay of artificial intelligence, the creation of anti-electronic warfare systems, how you prosecute and innovate on the ground. it is an underreported story how far ukraine has provided its own ammunition and its own

defense so when you think in a broader picture of what europe needs to do and how europe needs on a cost-effective basis to build up its own industrial, ukraine seems like an obvious opportunity for making that investment. how do you get the private investors back to look at those opportunities? >> i want to make sure we understand the technology that is not a part of reconstruction, for exports, hard currency and provides tax revenue in a country that's going to need them. all of that contribute in its own way to reconstruction. on the defense side it has become a country that is becoming very aware through their military, to the pentagon, that the ukrainians have been able in an accelerated fashion to not only learn what is useful and successful in the field but also to adapt. if you take the pentagon as an example, that adaptations cycle

is much longer and unrelated to what is happening on the battlefield. what ukraine offers is day by day as the russians day by day change their electronic warfare, the ukrainians are responding, that community, focused on this is starting to develop and the world is becoming cognizant of that value. overall, we need to get private sector to understand that not all of the country is equally at risk. there is through the national security council of ukraine a map of ukraine that shows the data of what has happened to date, where the bombings have been and where the destruction is, you can look at it by sector, by region and i think we need to be starting to show that not all of ukraine is equally at risk. i'm not saying not all of

ukraine is at risk because it is, the ballistic missiles reach the border of nato for sure but it is not equally at risk. the second thing is we've got to continue to create confidence that this is not the country we all talked about for the last ten years. ukraine has changed since 2014, changed psychologically since 2,004. from a reform standpoint, anticorruption standpoint, from an institution standpoint, from the role of civil society and monitoring this government, any government, ukraine is a different place than it was prior to 2,014 and i think too many members of the private sector in particular tell stories from pre-2014 about corporate raise or legislation that has already been changed and it is not a good script that has been developed to say it's not that anymore.

there's a piece of work by the ukrainian bar association that's valuable for corporates to see that legislation has changed. ukraine has a big job to do to convince people that this is not the country you thought it was back in the 1990s or the 2,000s. the governments since 2014, we were part of that have proven that those reforms are stable. as an example for vlad when we came into government, we had to close 300 banks because it was collapsing, the system wasn't properly regulated. today in a full-scale war the system stands. that's because of the strength of that regulator involved in ensuring and the strength of the fiscal system today and i think we have to change our view for the private sector to understand there's not only opportunity because i think everyone always thought ukraine

has opportunity but you can realistically make those investments, and the risk is not what you thought it was. >> i fully agree with natalie and just to add, responding to the previous question, you mentioned the reconstruction, while i appreciate the world bank's job, and partially that job, you can figure a little bit of skepticism about that because the war isn't continuing, doesn't put everything, we don't know a lot about everything from 2004 but looking at that, the reconstruction need is not on the sanction of damages, it's a function of the postwar vision, the vision is so far, we have a number of conferences in

london, which didn't come yet. it is true because the difficulty in a hot war to think about the longer-term vision and hoping the war will end sooner so there will be a next conference in rome and july, a good moment to discuss it. >> one of the important things that has been done with the big supportive imf is created the organization platform by -- it is much wider, 23 different players and global financial institutions and this group already met 12 times, they are meeting every 40 days with a structured agenda, different extremes, it is institutional reckoning and in order to go

further in line with instruction these frameworks should be something similar which during the marshall plan, a special agency dedicated for ukraine reconstruction. the ukrainians are very decentralized process and longevity reconstruction and the capacity should be increased and definitely the ownership of the vision should come from ukraine but there can be input from our partners, european-american partners. the business opportunities, the majority spent for reconstruction, public money to private money and the third thing is a discussion on how much money could be given to ukraine. in reality we have several

things. the tracking of the imf program and the minister of finance, reconstruction, the complexity of the process, a number of the deals in the region, number of potential players, business, these, just, to monitor how much money is provided to reconstruction. the world bank says 534 million is already met of what has been done thanks to questions to capture all the amounts. one of the things that could happen at the next stage, there should be some ukraine development bank or fund,

special fund which could be used for ukrainian reconstruction, the cpr paper on that and because this kind of thing would work together for the reconstruction agency, this could be a backstop for private investors and investments. >> let's go there with the russian sovereign assets. there are a lot of conflicting views about how to utilize them, whether they should be used for military support, should they be used for reconstruction, should they be provided to ukraine for reconstruction pledged as a deterrent, or a reward to russia for good behavior, there are a lot of ideas out there and some pushback against what

the implications would be around utilizing those assets and reminding there was a g7 initiative using proceeds generated from those assets to provide funding through the g7 platform to ukraine for a variety of different purposes. if i can get your reviews on what you think would be the best way to run the 200 billion sitting in europe right now? >> from my perspective, use it for the most critical need, today military is the most critical need, so be it. i don't believe this money is in any way going to serve as a deterrent for russia or as a carrot as the discussion earlier said because for the most part russia knows this money is not going to be there and it would be wrong to not have some type of reparations for the damage one party has

created in the country and i would love it if it was available for reconstruction. however, reconstruction depends on peace, peace depends on ukraine having strength. it is incumbent upon europe today which is struggling with how to fund this, to go ahead and find that way, not to be afraid of threats, not to be afraid of what this means for the euro, whatever it meant to the euro it happens when we froze it. it's not going to be anything that happens going forward. we need to find a way and find it fast. >> russia must pay and this is important. any idea to appease russia with this money, any idea to use as

collateral for meeting their obligations on the cease-fire is the wrong way to do it and doesn't assume this money to regional banks but they put it on the table, it would be interesting to discuss what general kellogg could do. but i think i like that approach so we need to use this money and you also mentioned today the factor that some ukrainian cities have vanished, the russian destruction and invasion, it is true. let's use this money to rebuild ukrainian cities according to new standards and business

opportunity for american companies. it can be done in order to participate in real estate projects. and the business and american business with economic treaty which we will discuss today but i will say again, european-american weapon depending how far we go to the end of the war but russia must pay. >> at this time i would like to take questions from the audience. we will do the next 30 minutes of q and a from washington dc and although viewers that we have onright now but if you have any questions please raise

your hand, right there. >> i wonder, speaking of the economic agreement, rare earth agreement, i wonder if you provide your assessment of that agreement for ukraine's economy, is it significant? is it realistic, quite apart from the issues we speak about, i am wondering your economic expertise, how do you assess that agreement. >> ukraine having that, the

ultimate guarantee of national security, the devil is in the details in terms of in terms of the framework for ukraine is being asked to sign but geology and assets underground, over the long term. the infrastructure that is related on the table. ukraine needs to make sure it works in their interests and there is a shared economic development to this simply binds the us and particularly this administration to open the channels so they can actually the pause for military provisions.

it is fixated on the president, ukraine is struggling. >> for ukraine, that is critical, that's not an early version, and it is explored. for usgs. i don't think you could expect this will provide an immediate economic benefit to ukraine or the united states over a period of time.

and and it is not going to do, to put us investors on the ground tomorrow. >> if we look at the current version of the agreement, it touches the future, not the previous one. what was readily in the ukrainian budget assumes that. most of those things will require not only time. for building infrastructure. can we do it together, i hope yes. can we do it without a country,

the reconstruction of ukraine. and i have a program that is apparently country blunter a to that. this is important for any investors, if you put special investments in foreign currency, you print reserve, the value of your investments and what you have is create a lot of the currency and foreign currency it is also about right policies, so you don't avoid the budget in bad shape,

governance reforms under the program, in those reports, anticorruption, important elements of potential economic treaty. the devil is in the details. >> i want to circle to the mill tech valley, a dynamic part of the ukrainian economy for circumstances. public money is being driven by exigency's, the question is in a future scenario, what does the future of military spending and ukraine look like? is it going to crater and go down by a substantial margin? current needs will be

sustained, will be a defense material exporter? what is the future of that asset that is being used right now? >> it is not public money now, the government makes, they are buying this, ten years ago, the majority in ukraine, in public holding which is producing the military and defense, a big portion of deliberations, a lot of private companies producing drones, there's a lot of investment. investing to ukraine and the defense secretary. and just to be very accurate.

and they are not only battle tested. you have, from the changes, the group of innovation is so short, i spoke with some guys who are producing drones, 15 km, in two weeks, managed to bring three times bigger systems, soft, and check forces in ukraine and expertise but these are because there's an order for that. when i speak to those guys who are producing that, the standard is very difficult

because a lot of the use things on the fields invest in innovation to register visa and these happen with governance. speaking of european security, we saw what happened in germany. there would be a big demand for technologies, ukraine being battle tested and a potential supplier for that. and recommendation from the technology perspective considering we are fighting such a powerful system. >> i'm not a military expert

but i think we have seen the field of war has changed and it is moving forward in terms of technology and away from big armored personnel carriers. i was told recently i tank ten minutes on the field because of drones. when we think about drones i also think it is important government buying is public money. that will continue, you won't stop innovating and stop producing. a neighbor for 600 years, and as we didn't think about this, there are very inexpensive ways to control the streets so we have to worry globally, how these things might be used by

terrorists. they are small and easy to find. everyone will have an interest in this technology and ukraine will have an export market and it is important to note that almost all of it now is produced by the private sector. may be purchased not the state owned arms company manufacturing the competitive drones. >> when they speak about modern defense, not there. speaking about drones, it is not a technical thing, the combination of ai, a combination of connectivity, or

about the skills, the thousands of people who operate drones or managing them, the anatomy of drones, the combination of all these things, such a leapfrog way that are remarkable. >> there already are, pouring their funds into ukrainian, a couple years ago and ramped up 4 million drones out of ukraine and 6% of all production has been from ukraine and manufacturing, you will see a lot of increase in that sector because it is unique and cutting edge.

people also forget, the soviet production, missiles and tanks, military warfare capability came out of ukraine. a lot of expertise in manufacturing. >> when people say ukraine is not recruiting people to the military, they are fighting with a different set. >> some of the cities are not bad. >> i think we had a question from online. >> we will take our next question from toby gaddy. >> hi, toby.

>> toby worked in the nsc and the state department. my question is the connection between the military and security situation, america's misguided policy, that there would be no ukrainian attacks into russia but russia's attacks continue literally today into ukraine. to end those attacks, what you are doing making it more difficult to rebuild and making everything you rebuild a potential target of an attack. my question is what is the connection between reconstruction and future conduct of the war which will go on for a a while. none of you have mentioned the fate of the nuclear power

plants which is a separate issue, potentially explosive but in every sense of the word. thank you very much and your panel is a really good one. >> the first for reconstruction was made and didn't in the last year to bring it together. most europeans think what to do and one of the questions, the end of the war, directed for the construction or not. natalie mentioned the reality in ukraine, reconstruction is on the line. what came to ukraine, the

bridges will be destroyed and the railroads would not work. there is a lot down on the building, bomb shelters, this has been done. if you take this out, there are big investments with the economic treaty. as general kellogg said, with standard meteorological services. the break in the city, every two years. even, with funding and design plans with business model and

finding construction companies. the end of the war, for construction, we should have done this before. if of the war finishes soon we are not ready for any reconstruction. we need to do it now and work on visa. an effort to make it happen. the united states going back to the marshall plan, a 1948 moment in 1944, the second world war, at the end of the

war, outside the country, millions of people internally displaced and a few years, the majority are keys and they study languages, a lot of divorced families and people going there, we will lose these. this is one of the biggest losses which we can use, this is one of the biggest losses for ukraine so we need to show some sort of vision for the future which people could use as an anchor, why they need to come back to ukraine, their legacy, not only because of their home about because they want to participate in the next

big thing in europe, these are big projects, a lot of demand for the labor force that we are missing already and we need to have that in ukraine so we need to plan now. >> i was trying to make the same point you were making when i began, the destruction is going to come faster and harder going forward if we are not able to having ukraine the air defense capacity to protect hours cities. doesn't require a genius or military expert to understand the limited number of interceptors. it is a limited number of things and if we are not able to protect our cities the other side will bomb from. yesterday and the day before are examples of that. it makes reconstruction more expensive but it the same time it makes air defense the number

one demand on the side of ukraine because it is civilian lives, civilian infrastructure. ukraine can manufacture its own weapons and europe can provide weapons better defense is critical to not allowing the for the destruction of a nuclear power plant. yes, to answer that part of the question, they have control, the largest nuclear power plant. not unlike the illegally occupied territory, they don't have a right to it and it is extraordinarily dangerous. they've been using it to store military equipment, to have military teams so we definitely should be negotiating to get the power plant that, ukraine has done a good job expanding its ability to provide electricity to its people

without it meaning increasing the amount of electricity that can be imported from europe, a project to expand nuclear power capacity at existing facilities and more. but i think there's a huge danger to the world and allowing that to remain in illegally occupied control. >> we had a saying the best thing is a good air defense system. this helps you to keep the economy better for sure and on nuclear factories for economic deal, generating what we had before. if you want to have electricity in europe, data centers or production, in ukraine.

>> thanks very much. i wanted to ask about how much cooperation ukraine has had from european partners, in locating displaced citizens who are living abroad, potentially making sure everyone is filing their taxes on time. of foreseeable need for tax revenue in ukraine, some of which will be answered by the displaced population, thinking of repatriation, creating the paul factors, what cooperation has the ukraine government had from other governments.

>> in warsaw, don't be afraid, thank you very much, i would like to feel themselves more as guests. the ukrainian people who moved to europe, young women, intelligent, educated, school age, the majority of investments the last few years, there will be competition for these people in the future but we are thankful to the european government, other countries,

how to host ukrainians, provide access to education, the minister of unity and national unity, the task is to incentivize the economic incentives and to think what needs to be done but also the housing, these are the major elements, economic deals and community development to bring economic growth, these are important things, from their visit to germany where they deal with special hubs, where they provide counselor surfaces, job opportunities,

hubs together with foreign affairs, the support throughout europe. >> i've not seen any country put in place a repatriation except what we are reading in the papers today that ukrainians may be losing refugee status. i've seen some countries reduce the amount of time over which ukrainian citizens can receive social support but ukrainians are more than willing to work. in some countries, poland for example, it's important to their economy. i haven't seen a repatriation policy although somewhat happily have ukrainians get off of social roles. >> we had one conference in the central bank of ukraine, the deputy governor of the central bank of poland saying get it

helped reduce pressure for the prices in poland and demand for the price was lower and unfortunately when you analyze, usually two levels lower, but i saw in europe, came to lower positions, developing that but we need to create opportunities to come back. >> time for another question here? >> international crisis group, thank you for this panel. i wonder if you could comment on the anti-collaboration law

which was passed after the information. there's been a critique of the people who might be able to contribute to reconstruction, fairly stigmatized and there have been talks about your perspective on that. >> what laws? >> anti-collaboration. i don't know the specific law but every day ukraine is arresting people for treason and the fifth column or whatever you wish to call it throughout ukraine is very strong because of the background. you have to on the side of safety, i don't know what the law says but loose lips ship sinks, ukrainians have to be

and have to be careful the fifth column is not strengthened in any way. >> right here. >> brookings international, the context of the broader need for capital and manpower for develop intent reconstruction what do you see as china's role in any scenario emerging after the war, whatever various options are, do you see china playing no role or summerall or development banks, china's mission as opposed to those institutions. >> we heard in the earlier panel before the russian invasion china was the largest investor. >> the largest importer of ukrainian goods. i didn't want to correct that arson. that's an important

distinction, they were buying a lot of agricultural grades. my answer is china was on the wrong side and we should not allow them to invest going forward. they've contributed, they are part of the fourth one and i don't think we should invite north korea or china in. that said, we will need access to capital and we know china's practices have been to lend money with little to no preconditions and they also offer labor which is labor is an issue so you will see them trying but i would hope the allies would stand up, broadly speaking to invest rather than china. >> i would more vote for a combination of collaboration of

the economic treaty when you ask for their postwar reconstruction, russian assets and development bank which would do that and we will manage without others. >> that brings us exactly to 1:00, we want to end on time, we've had a great conversation today. i want to thank natalie and vlad for their insight. it's been a rich conversation and we all learned from your experience. thank you for joining us for this long day on ukraine. it is top of mind for a lot of us so thank you for joining us. >> we all wore suits so you know we respect you. [applause] >> and we thank you.

[inaudible conversations] >> a look at live coverage coming up on c-span. at 12:30 eastern federal reserve chair jerome powell will deliver keynote remarks over 2,025 us monetary policy forum hosted by the university of chicago's school of business and later in the evening at 7:00 eastern maryland congressman jamie raskin will be joined by law professors and human rights advocates for discussion on civil rights and rule of law, posted by politics and prose bookstore, you can watch live coverage on the c-span now apps are online, c-span.org. >> booktv every sunday on c-span2 features leading authors discussing their latest nonfiction books. coming up this weekend at 8:00 pm eastern reason magazine senior editor brian doherty talks about the