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 [applause] >> also from the council on foreign relations, former ukrainian defense officials look

ahead at building efforts once ukrainian's war with russia concludes. 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. that is why we are here to talk about reconstructing ukraine. to level set i think we are also optimistic in a postwar situation you have the talent and the opportunity as ukraine is on the path toward e you integration.

it has a lot of friends. and a lot of support from official institutions. from the ims, eid, give bilateral support. you have multiple different that have gathered in order to provide support for ukraine. so, i would like to get a sense. i will start with you on just level set. what have we seen so far in terms of support for ukraine has been brought about by russian 2022 invasion bricks things. thank you for organizing this event. especially at this time. there have been a lot of things done in the last few years. in addition a lot of it has been

written there. it's for victory not for peace. on the major things that happened in the last three years what we see now is an attack on ukraine by russia, a brutal attack. 2004 when ukraine chose the european union vector of development and decided to run away from soviet union. the actions of what europeans did with ukraine the last year's are remarkable it's part of the previous discussion. it's it program for ukraine. [inaudible] an act of war.

and the problem is the framework of exceptional uncertainty and what we have is fitting. but the problem is working. we just came back from kyiv and that problem is in the center of a lot of the different financial loss to ukraine. it's big but the total amount of money which ukraine received already i'm only speaking about the budget we support is the military. for three years and it plays an important role in that. there are other institutions that did a lot. the world bank is a lot in the money from from uk, from japan,

from other countries. created a platform of 19 different in order to coinvest in ukraine. it's one of the biggest investors in ukraine and therefore under the advice we do a great job on ukraine. but these together a program which has been approved by the european union. in the umbrella. a lot has been done in terms of buildings and structure it was created in ukraine. we have substantially improved the management framework for

ukraine. which is also important for future investors and future economic which general kellogg was saying it's very important also for u.s. investors to see the results of that. >> thank you. natalie can ask the same question. but also try and give us a sense of what is left to be done in terms of preparing, hopefully for a period where we have a reduction in hostilities and aggression i get ukraine and an opportunity. the piece that can underpin you creating growth. >> thank you very much again for having me. i'm going to go back a little bit and give you a little color on those numbers that we talked about. so that we all have a sense of the size of what we are doing. first of all the 524 billion is only for the getting the full

scale invasion. so three years i want everyone to understand that it is more than that. this war has been going on for 11 years. we have no idea today in the temporarily illegally occupied territory what kind of damage has occurred. we do not know the extent of the damage. what truly has been rebuilt. that number is an understatement to begin with. second, it's important to note that number increases daily. and yesterday they bombed a hotel the ballistic missile. they promised to go for 150 drones to 500. this is in light of the intelligence being shut off which you will see natural increase activity and increase destruction for the last point i will say about the 5242 given a sense of how large it is, it's

about 2.8 times 24 gp of ukraine it is estimated that amount would be invested over 10 years. certainly, it is important i think to also note this is not just about when peace comes or when there is a cessation of violence. urgent reconstruction has been going on every day since the first day and there are multiple reasons for that one is pure need when the russians blow up the dm water back to people on the part of the country who have been denied water. other parts has to do with creating a sense of confidence among the people that we have the capability to build back. so after that it was important to rebuild quickly to show people that we have that capacity. it's also important to note that

for ukraine, it's important in terms of getting those refugees 7 million or more confidence there's going to be something to come home too. and so when you look at what's been done, the number one damage point in the number when rebuilding point have been housing and there's a reason it's housing. i agree a great deal's been put in place in terms of structures. ukraine is very far along in terms of growing a public investment management system in producing something called the dream system which is a portal developed by civil society together the government that has right now over 10,000 or so projects inputted. donors can use it to identify if i want to work on school bunkers and we went to work on hospitals you can try to identify partners there. it can also be used for monitoring going forward as the

project move forward i think it's important to note ukraine does is not only in line with their needs but with a couple other goals until reconstruction was supposed also for the commitments of reaching the eu that's a very difficult thing. you can well imagine rebuilding a road per eu standards and building a road for emergency standards in ukraine are very different and very different cost. not to mention the legal basis is not fully there to use the standard jet in ukraine but that is an element i think ukraine is very focused on inclusivity and unsustainability. so it is building back better tothe extent we understae society that we have today and will have tomorrow. private sector engagement there's no way bilateral government international financial institutions would be able to afford work should be in a position to afford that 524 or

more million dollars that should be a significant substantial private sector contribution. i think the challenge for ukraine today is very much in keeping people aware we need to do this now, not to wait that's what i'm going to go back to it does not have to be the cessation of violence. there's may be areas you want to avoid that are on the frontline but there are many things that can be done today again in restoring medical and putting bunkers into schools. there are things that need to be done today and can be done. i think the donor platforms and the systems that are been put into place to some extent are all were going to get in terms of systems but i think ukraine is prepared for them both with its internal recovery agency and its strategic investment counsel for the work they are doing to

create a single project pipeline. the challenge is not institution it is an capacity this should not be it will not and cannot be a centralized system. it has to be deep centralized they have a very centralized government system. that is why in the dream portal there being encouragement projects in. the capacity at that level looked local level much less of the central level yes they're putting in two different centers of project preparation unit on the facility. i can't serve the differences. it won't be enough there's a labor shortage right now.

the skill sets to do this the all of those things are in dire need to move it projects long after 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. so, from my perspective the international community is there they are doing things now. they're doing them consistently. it's about seven -- $10 billion of work being done a year. the needs have been outlining 14 to 17 billion a year the governments have done well i'm trying to provide war insurance for the private sector contribution. the project you have the american dfc project. there are various ways to accelerate insurance available to private sectors. but right now what we need to do is increase capacity and create

the platform, create the environment though with the thae private sector back and slowly until cessation. but back in one way or the other. >> can i just pick up on the important point of the private sector customer the numbers are large and the opportunity is actually enormous. because it goes far beyond the critical minerals and rare earth the titanium, uranium, the lithium. ukraine has enormous high-tech talent leading cyber talents. it has a mining trained workforce that is largely out fighting a war right now. but, it also was the leading edge of technology.

literally the cutting edge over the future of warfare is in the overlay of artificial intelligence. the creation of anti- electronic warfare systems. how you actually prosecute and innovate on the ground. it's an underreported story of just how far ukraine has been able to provide for its own ammunition and its own defense. when you think in a broader picture of what europe needs to do on how europe needs to on a cost-effective basis on the industrial basis ukraine seems like an obvious opportunity for making that investment. >> how to get the private and vectors back to look at the opportunities? works also want to make sure even if the technology is not part of a reconstruction provides good jobs. it provides for experts, hard currency and provides for tax revenue in the country this going to need them.

so all that contributes in its own way to reconstruction. i think on the defense side countries are becoming very aware through their militant to the pentagon that the ukrainians have been able to come in a very accelerated fashion not only learn what is useful and successful in the field but also to adapt if you take the pentagon as an example that adaptation cycle is much much longer lead is unrelated let's say what's happening on the battlefield. what ukraine offers is direct experience day by day as the russians day by day chains are electronic warfare the respondent with theirs. i think on that military side.community or senior capitol funds are focused on this is starting to develop i think the world is becoming cognizant of that value.

over all we need to get the private sector to understand that not all of the country is equally at risk. there is, to the national security council of ukraine a map of ukraine that shows the date of what's happened to date where the bombings have been, or the destruction is you can look at it by sector you can look at it by region. i think we need to be starting to show not all of ukraine is equally at risk for it i'm not saying all of ukraine is at risk because it is the ballistic missiles reach the border of nato for sure. but it's not equally at risk for the second thing is it got to continue to create confidence this is not the country we all talked about for the last 10 years. in other words ukraine has changed i would say since 2014, changes psychologically since 2004.

teen, you know, we were part of that, proven that they are stable. when we came into government i think 100 or 300 banks because

it was collapsing. today the system stands. that is because of the strength of that regulator that was involved in ensuring in the strength of the fiscal system today. i think everyone has always thought ukraine has an opportunity. >> may be just to add the few elements to the previous question of the meeting. you mentioned therefore the reconstruction while i appreciate the world bank job in the economic partially the job i look at this with a little bit

of skepticism because the war is continuing. we don't know a lot about these controlled territories. it is not only that. the construction need is not only the function of damages. the number of london and berlin. it is true. it is difficult to think about the longer-term vision and hopefully it would be ended sooner so there will be a conference in rome in july. a big supporter was created multi- donor platform.

it is much wider. twenty-three different players for the global financial institution. it is every 40 days with a captured agenda. the different streams, i mean, it is really institutional. to go further these institutional frameworks should be something similar for the eca so special agencies can make 100 % time. i agree with this. the reconstruction and kiva and the region. the capacity there should be increased.

the donor and partners and american partners and how we can build. this also gives us opportunities the majority for reconstruction for private money. the discussion on how much money for ukraine. it will be a little bit wider and reconstruction unit

there should be some sort of ukraine developed bank or fund a special fund on the reconstruction. this kind of development for the agency. this will bring together money and a backstop for a lot of the private investors for ukraine. 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 and should they be provided for ukraine for construction. pledge is a deterrent. there are a lot of ideas out there. and some pushback against what the implications would be around actually utilizing. actually using the proceeds that are generated from those assets to actually provide funding through the g7 lab form to ukraine for a variety of different purposes. if i can get your views on what would be the best, the 200 billion.

>> from my perspective you have to use it for the most critical needs. military is our most critical need, so be it. i do not believe it will serve as a deterrent for russia or as a ^-caret as the discussion earlier said. i think for the most part russia knows that this money is not going to be theirs. and it would be wrong to not have some kind of reparation for the damage that one party has created in this country. i would love it if it was available for reconstruction, however, reconstruction in a sense really depends on peace and peace depends on ukraine having strength. so, i think, it is incumbent upon europe today which is struggling with how to be fund this to go ahead and find that way, not to be afraid of threat that euro bonds will be purchased, not to be afraid of

what this means. >> it will not be anything that happens going forward. the wrong way for the lead russia but definitely they will try. they will put it on the table. discussing for they could do that with that. but i think it is right. i like the approach.

we need to use this money. also mentioning today the fact that some ukrainians took advantage of the results of the russian destruction and invasion it is true. let's eat use this. let's build according to the new standard. this is also, again, business opportunity for american companies. participating in the state project. you can build factories there and the business there and this could also be american business in european business. economic treaty which we will also discuss today. i will say to you that the current stage is money used for the military. european american weapons.

and as to fight depending on how far we go with the end of the war but russia must pay. >> so, at this time, i would like to take some questions from the audience. we will do the next 30 minutes or so of q&a from washington, d.c. and all the viewers that we have on zoom right now. if you have any questions, please raise your hand. right here, sir. >> thank you. paul jones. i wonder the economic agreement. i wonder if you could each provide your assessment of the importance of that agreement for ukraine's economy, for reconstruction, is it significant, is it realistic,

what time frame, quite apart from the issues we spoke about this morning, security guarantee or political impacts. how do you assess that agreement thank you. >> i wrote about this before anyone actually talked about ukraine. i think that with the trump administration absolutely the shared economic security is the way other than trump would see as the ultimate guarantee of national security. the devil is in the details in terms of the term sheet or the framework. whatever it is ukraine being asked to sign, but the assets that are underground over the long term. the infrastructure that is related on the table right now from the last version that i

thought. there is a shared economic development element to this that really binds the u.s. and particularly this administration to open the channels so that they can actually move forward and release the pause on the military, provisions of weapons and military support and intelligence provision. i think until that actually, it is fixated in the presidents mind and until that is signed, i think ukraine is going to be struggling. >> from an economic standpoint, i think it is important that the last version had the monies going into an investment fund for reconstruction for ukraine. i was not in earlier versions. the devil is in the details. it's also important to know much of this has not yet been truly

explored. going to send in usgs. i don't think you can expect this will provide an economic benefit to ukraine or the united states. it will be over a period of time this is something that has to be properly surveyed and binding does not take a short period of time. i think it is extremely valuable symbolically and in terms of our relationship with the united states. very valuable to the trump administration. i just think it we will not have u.s. investors on the ground tomorrow. it is kind of a long-term strategy. >> i see it as positive of the agreement because it touches the future not the previous ones so it is not like extracting and

the ukrainian. and therefore i agree none of the things will require. exploration had even for building infrastructure. would like to have american investors in ukraine. can you do it together? i hope, yes. can you do it with other countries, i hope, yes. the reconstruction of ukraine because ukraine has the value and these things are positive. conducting the program. building the financial stability these are important of any investors that come. inflation because if you put the

special investment in the foreign currency, you want to reserve what you will have in local currency. in foreign currency so you need to convert money. therefore you want this to be preserved. second thing, the program is also about the right policies, right fiscal policies. you want to avoid the bad shape. the anticorruption i think should be important elements. and the potential economic treaty. evolution space. i want to circle back to this piece of this.

the results of the circumstances a lot of that still being you and by public money which is obviously being driven by survival for ukraine. the question is in a future scenario where there is peace, what does the future of that look like? is it going to equator and go down by a substantial margin? do you think that current needs will continue to be sustained? is the plant to be a defense material exporter but what is the future of that asset that is currently being used for the battlefield conditions right now the mac i slightly disagree with you. the government is saying we are buying this. like 10 years ago is majority in ukraine, the government holding producing the military defense.

what happened now is for truly a big portion of deliberations. which are producing drones but not only drones. you look at the investments coming. the funds investing to ukraine in the defense secretary. and we really made this. i to be very accurate. what i heard from an expert is when i speak about drones but not only drones you know, the defense technologies, they are better innovative. the loop from the changes is so short. i spoke with some guys who are producing drones. 15 kilometers and in two weeks

managed to bring three times bigger territory because this is what they do. the tech forces in ukraine tech expertise in there. this is ongoing because there is order for that. when i speak of those guys, the standard is very difficult. investing in the rights. and if this happens and invest for governance and the companies i am sure speaking about the european security no matter the deal with ukraine we saw what happened.

there will be a big demand for military and technologies. better tested and they did potential supplier for that. also documentation. the policy respected they are not bad. such a powerful system. >> again, i am not a military expert either. i think we have seen that the field of war has changed forever it is only moving forward in terms of technology and away from the big tanks in the big armored personnel carriers. i was told a tank left less than 10 minutes on the field.

for 600 years or more trying to commit genocide. we will have to keep producing. but also i think drones or something from the united states we have to think globally about how these things will be used by gangs and terrorists. everyone will have an interest in the technology. almost all of it right now in ukraine is produced by the private sector. it is not the state owned armed company manufacturing the competitive drones. >> the important thing is when

they speak about the modern, you know, thousand. we are not there. speaking about drones for example. the technical, you know, thing. it is a combination of the connectivity. they are trained drones managing them and train them how to make them manage the drones. there already are, pouring their funds starting as artisanal a

couple years ago. 96% of all of production has been from ukraine. the manufacturing facilities. i think that you will see a lot of inquiries because it is unique and cutting edge. the cutting edge we have in the world with us right now. during the soviet days 13% of the soviet production of the military warfare capability came out of ukraine. there is a long-standing expertise. not recruiting young people for the military. the young people are definitely involved in this. it would not have happened with all of them.

the mac i would love to build cities. it is not bad. >> i think we had a question from online. >> we will take our next question. please accept the unmute now prompt. >> the state department and the clinton administration. my question is, the connection between the military and the security situation. america's misguided policy is now that they can be no ukrainian attacks into russia but russia tax continued today even literally into ukraine.

doesn't there have to be a priority to end those attacks. they are making it more difficult to rebuild and making everything you rebuild a potential target of the attack. my question is, what is the connection between reconstruction in the future conduct of the war which will go on for a while. which is a separate issue. potentially i want to say explosive in every sense of the world get. bringing 40 people mostly europeans to think what to do. one of the questions after the

war finishes. absolutely not. the reconstruction, none of them would be able to come to ukraine the railroad would not work and et cetera. this is the reconstruction ongoing. down on the building, the protection, this has been done in the last years. even if you take this out, if you have some big investments today, speaking about the economic as general kellogg said

, you need to have the exploration. you need to understand you send the services. if you plan to build cities from the moment you have this idea to maybe the moment you put the first break in the city is 30 years. in a very optimistic way. people together, you need to find funding. you know, what it can be in the business model. you know, finding construction, building this many for years. so, therefore, the end of the war is definitely not the prerequisite for construction. you know, we should have done this before. maybe to say that if the war finishes soon we are not ready. we need to do it now and we need

to work on this and therefore to make it happen. going back to the marshall plan, i say we need to avoid the moment because the plan was designed in 1954. which means like three years after the end of the second world war. we do not have the privilege to wait for years until the end of the war. we have several millions of people outside of the country. we have millions of people in terms of displays. they have been doing this for years in europe. keith has already started languages for the families and a lot of divorced families and the people finding new families in europe who will lose these. this is one of the biggest losses. the human capital losing

millions of people. the biggest loss for ukraine. needing to show the opportunity to people. the vision for the future which people could use an anchor. why they need to come back to ukraine. not because of their legacy. not only because of their home. but because they want to be there. they want to participate in the revival. the next big thing in europe, more reconstruction. these will be big projects. a lot of the demand of the labor force. we need to have that in ukraine. we need to plan now. >> trying to make the same point you were making when i began. the destruction is going to come faster and much harder going forward if we are not able to have in ukraine the air defense

capacity to protect our citizens it does not require a genius or military expert to figure out these interceptors. it is a limited number of things and if we are not able to protect, the other sides will bomb them. yesterday and the day before examples of that. it makes reconstruction much more expensive. at the same time it also makes their defense probably the number one demand on the side of ukraine because of that. because it is civilian lives. civilian infrastructure. ukraine can manufacture a lot of its own weapons and europe can provide weapons, but air defense is critical for not allowing for the destruction of a nuclear power plant, as you just said. to answer that part of the question they have control, the

largest nuclear power plant. not on the illegally occupied territory, they do not have a right to it and it is extraordinarily dangerous. they been using it to have military teams in there. so, i think, definitely should be negotiating to get that powerplant back. i do think ukraine has done a good job in expanding its ability to provide electricity to its population without it, meaning increasing the amount of electricity that can be imported from europe now project to expand nuclear power capacities at the existing facilities and more. but i think it is a huge danger to the world and allowing us to remained completely occupied and control. >> we had a saying the best monetary policy is a good system

it helps you to keep the economy even for the economic deal, what was before. if you want to have cheaper electricity in europe, nor even for the production, these definitely should be. one question right here, sir. >> thank you very much. james stephens. i wanted to ask about how much cooperation ukraine has had from european partners in locating its displaced citizens that are now living abroad and potentially making sure everyone is filing their taxes on time, that sort of thing. we have a foreseeable need for

tax revenue were reconstruction in ukraine, some of which will be answered by some of the displaced population. also through repatriation beside creating couple factors you are talking about, how much cooperation between government from other european governments. >> in october 2022 i was speaking from the conference and after the conference of it he came to me, do not be afraid. your people here can feel themselves at home. i said thank you very much. i would like to feel themselves more as a new gasket let me be very frank. the ukrainian people that moved to europe, the majority is young women, you know, in the working age and intelligence.

not only the birth age, but school age. the majority of investments in the first few years, but lately becoming human capital. i think that there will be a competition for these people in the future but so far what we see is good. we are thankful to the european government. and also to other countries to house ukrainians who provided them access to education, access to health. i wasn't keep two weeks ago. actually the task is to incentivize the incentives and social incentives to bring people home. also what needs to be done. also housing. those jobs, the economic deals and economic developments.

coming from that. where they provide the services. just becoming more fair. the big >> we will leave this for a discussion with jamie raskin hosted by politics and prose bookstore. live coverage on c-span >> thanks so much to everyone for coming out. this is so energizing to see a room of