a documentary series about the future of food with the great debate this week on t w. ah ah ah, this is dw news live from berlin on pablo for lillius and welcome to this special life program. as world leaders are meeting in germany for the 3rd and final day of talks at the munich security conference, i'm are gonna be bringing you live coverage from at munich that rushes war on

you train has dominated the agenda so far with leaders affirming their long term support for keep on saturday, us vice president comma harris told the conference. russia must be held to account for what she called crimes against humanity. day 3 gets under way with stony and prime minister class and swedish prime minister of prescription taking center stage along with the european commission vice president to sam brown with. all right, well joining us now from the munich security conference, as we're waiting for at dasa panel discussion to get underway is our chief political correspondent, nina has a nina great to see again. now, one of today's discussions which i, as of mentioned, we're going to be bringing to our viewers live in, well, just

a few minutes is called back to the future visions for the europeans security architecture. nena is europe on its way to becoming more independent of the united states in terms of security policy. well, of course, this is not an entirely new discussion. european leaders have been talking about this subject for quite some time. but i would say that there were 2 events in the recent past that really underlined the need for this to happen. the need for europe to become strategically independence, strategically autonomous one was the presidency in than the united states of america by donald trump. somebody who made it very clear that he's working towards american interests only, where europeans really felt left alone by one of their closest allies and as europeans, all stress here, that they're very happy with the biden administration. but that nobody can rule out that this situation might change very, very quickly. if the u. s. presidential elections provide

a different result than many here are hoping for. and of course, the other big event was russia's large scale invasion of ukraine last february. and especially the baltic states are saying we need to become independent. we need to be able to defend ourselves properly. and there's also going to be a very big discussion about finland and nate and sweet and joining nato. now sweeten is having problems with tacky, which is obviously also a native member that still has to give its consent to finland and sweden joining nato. so at the moment, and there is some difficulty in this munich security conference can't be used to sort of bridge the gaps between sweden and tacky because turkey has not sent any officials because of the devastating earthquakes that you have. there's plenty, plenty to discuss it today. mean an hour estonian prime minister can you call us as and is on this of corner of coming handle were just seeing images there. it looks

like actually the moderator, and i'm just seeing images. is that preparing every one for those members of the panel to come on stage? now, like i said to sonya prime minister congress is on the upcoming panel. how important is dom unit security conference for m a small country at the end of the day, like estonia, that neighbors, russia, small countries like estonia, but also fin and have really found their foreign policy voices that defense policy voices here in the international sphere that being taken very seriously, especially the finish prime minister, she kate and come out, comes out regularly with whole case statements. one would say, and stressing the fact that with high country is and throwing away decades. all of that foreign policy principles because they feel threatened by russia is donya very much also stressing not message. estonia is one of the countries that is pushing the most, for russian officials to be held accountable for the establishment of

a special tribunal. that can it was the deal with crimes against humanity. dina looks like we're going to leave it there with you for the moment as we're seeing the european commission vice president and the high representative for foreign affairs and security at 2 separate has taken at to the stage. they're up munich. so we're going to take a listen now that they need to be legit blowed. i'm better so blight. we talked to pena fighting, paying the highest price in total life. but these will happen to you to be in child affect us and has a global impact around the world, which also affect levels security. so let's talk about these short term, long term, our neighborhood, and in the wider world. what the german chancellor kohl and shaping wind

satan wednesday. not only for germany but to football d to be and i think that we face 3 major challenges. first our credibility as a level player that want to be goal that you politically. second, i wish to take your responsibility as a security and defense provider answer when gauge men with partners around the world. and to preserve or even rebuild trustful cooperation with many of the show goal, global stuff. but i didn't micron said about that that he was cry by a big re sentiment that he received in many countries around the world. and i share this feeling. so when he took office in 2019 we started talking about, did you politically,

we go to use the language of power one. youtube is in danger. he said, when we presented just a basic compass and many wonder it, eva, this was not just that slogan. an exaggeration, you know, that table, better to product. unhappily, there was no crane has perverted. this is logan's into reality at dramatic reality . and he has made, does to go up to wake up to one game of ad pool hot either hood. we have read these coverage, do tally, deal all day in to the state war war. this and we are becoming an actor, credible, able to use course you do the ones who said it then us, as i said, rushes st. denila security. and we are using question. we are becoming a hard to follow what you have done, you know,

as lot of sanctions against russia economy and russia, individuals. they are having effect from gold on the day. but you have a look. i did trade deficit budget that to shoot an income coming from stellan hydrocarbons. these 3 key variables shows that these yet russia is going down last year was a very good deal for them this year. going to be a better idea because we had been able to get great up over their fantasy from russia. hydrocarbons from 40 percent guys dependency to almost 0 in a few months. he's an extraordinary achievement gap under russian oil. the i say in there all you have to price your brand, $40.00 when dividend is that 80 and mid thirty's to port the ukraine directly funded would be a union not from did a via union budget. let's clarify it. not from the budget that the commission

manage, but from an intern, woburn i meant the fall. i can me of a club that members stage happily created in order to provide training unarmed, de la fontose, the show goal, it'll be a beast facility. the member stage decided to use least fun to arm grain. $3.00, billions and the member to state each one on their site. sama, a lot of us, less but of i didn't all in all, 12000000000 yielded from media cardio support and is used to major achievement. it is the 1st time that we do that we have breaking it to war. and it is important to continue doing that. we are the most important train it a euclidean army. by the end of the yes, 30000 who canyon soldiers will be trained by one military mission. i don't go to

the details, but this is what we had been doing, but much more has to be done on am much weaker did is a still a lot to be done. we had to increase our and accelerate our military support to grant. quickly. the 1st and most urgent, the saying that that you politically window a patch to do he's to arm you green. the we said has all due to be a leaders here said yesterday that russia cannot win his war. that ukraine has to prevail then led to go from towards to the fax, an exit at 8. our military is report to ukraine because from granny's in the critical situation from define to be with him when ation available. and i think that we can say that we have been taken to many times today, critical decisions of providing battle. thanks. when anybody know that the know that we know war at war and classical war we trying season and maneuvers or

heavy armed, you need battle bags. you're when like wind is war without this kind of arms. and now the shortage of ammunition has to be solved quickly. it's a matter of which and this cannot be solved by going into joining barracuda mens. i'm buying because of any procurement that comes to the market. we'll go and dig few off a long list of commands already pass by the member to state. we had to use what we have, what the member states have, and they have to provide quigley apart or them when asian waiting to really feel bashed, talk with the command that are already being boss in the shorter we need. and we have a, b and b's facility that can engage their resources in order to put away quickly. and when you change to ukraine and in the medium turner will have to increase the

capacity of allow defense industry much more. but these are not going to happen overnight and we have to go and we also have the tools to do that, that have to, to be in defense agency, which is something especially in this kind of matters. you know that to get more and one issue and for all of us, but mainly and with a strong priority for the you printing. don't confuse the short term objective with the medium therapy purposes. shortens ready, shorter terms, more munitions. do you believe this is a matter of diminishing the finish? is the minute to know the finish, the current minister of defense, she'll have to take these kind of decisions. and there's going to be an extraordinary meeting on the 6th and 7th of march, where we will propose to accelerate aid to process that are already on the way.

and i think that working altogether we can manage more grown lee. we have to do our homework. this from work has been defined by this that they had come, but that was approved some days before the war started. and there is clearly define how we can increase our role as security and defense actor on the new battle fields to cyberspace. they see places where they would have a different characteristics, money, time, shift, unity, space, you, good indian defense among other cyber defense. because, you know, we forgot about classical wars. we where only engage on expeditions and the british greek technological british, greek b is all war. we will not be bad about them and now we have to recover capacity.

but keeping in mind, the de wall in the future will be a different one. and we require different capacities and our industry has to be up . and i will proceed just also. it takes almost fenmont with new b anatomy to buy a bullet for the canyon of $155.00 medium. it almost one here. an almost 3 is to buy an ad to where we cite these is not in accordance with things that we are leaving today. digital not enough. gordon, with a war she to ation in which we leave. this was helpful. she was president of the role of nato who has become again, a crucial active duty officer booted you a few it up. but it's also a week for you to be in to share the responsibility for the defense. and then as you go quickly to the geopolitical landscape,

yesterday president mcgraw, now brett in chantilly shows talk about it. we cannot think about to, to be in security without looking beyond and engaging with partners around the world. i am travelling along to worse, especially on the grove of south, and i see how bob would have full good russia narrative than once to reduce the war . you new grain, to a conflict between the west and russia, east, powerful. and with that, a lot of the accusations over double the standards. we must debunk these narrative and explain how russia acts as an imperialist follow. ready? makram said, and neo colonial power. yes, it is. what it is. let's call it is an imperialistic duke from a barbara to full made that once to take control of some one who believes belongs to each political sphere. we have to fight to false narrative. we must

engage with our partners defending together the common good united nation charter, but also being ready to accept that discharge that has to be adapted to cover him. just comes dantes of a world today, which is not a tool to world of 1945 the share of wealth, political influence, the number of people. he's completely different and we have with appetite. these war has also underline the vulnerabilities, the needs of our partners in phasing their socio economic and environmental challenges. and they fear that we focus only on ukraine and that we divert from our responsibilities in other areas. they blame us. what us we have to reassure them that we build model lead that we will increase hello

engagement and our to responsibilities with the rest of the world. because these war has increased the challenges that the world faces. and both in terms of price system resources, economic growth, and political and shook. and i'm in trouble. we have to prove that we continue being a global actor not only fixing our political and economic military capacity and this neighborhood, but taking very much into account in order to face these deep re sentiment in africa. due to post colonial reasons, crush report, it us all in late in america and the imperialism filling your support. did data ships, people have memory and people have feelings. so we have to engage more showing that we are defending universal values,

not only values that are good when you train how amendment is being invaded. but in a guy for us, for a while, and geopolitical action as, as you did your provider. and also as someone who defend united nation charter, i'm principles in that constant and comprehensive and corina and way. this is the big, the big challenge in front of us. short term, weak ammunitions megan term, increase the capacity of your defense industry. and from now, from to model and for a long time to look at the apartments in guest house in order to make them to participate in the world reaction against russia for the walk in. okay, thank thank you very much for that. oh hi representative. and now let me welcome on stage our carrier colors,

the prime minister, estonia, you who sees the prime minister o b. i just heard there from the foreign affairs. he said, you said porter l m because he that who spoke about you said that you use credibility as a global player on with regards to the war in ukraine. and as we're waiting for the panel discussion at the 1st one today, back to the future, it's titled visions for the european security architecture. we're just seeing images there of the moderator. not li, touchy as she's going to be on stage with the e. u foreign affairs chief to separate and also kind of callous to prime minister of estonia of tristram, send the prime minister of sweden and boucher osmani. he is a chariot chairperson in chief and the minister of foreign affairs for the republic of north macedonia. extreme,

all the other and now at that fudge and between ukraine and russia, have leon center stage on in these if the municipality conference. so let's go back to munich and take listening to this panel discussion between what it means for russia to lose this war. and what it means for ukraine to win this war. ah, and of course russia lose this for this is that short term question, which really has to do with what weapons be supplied to ukraine. however, ukraine to win this boy ha rushes defeat is a necessary but not a sufficient condition. what ukraine needs is democratic consolidation. it needs economic reconstruction, and it needs security guarantee. so to the extent possible, i'd really like to focus this discussion on, on those are sort of 3 sets of issues and perhaps prime minister and chris that. so let me begin with you. perhaps with actually

a very broad brush question. does it actually even make sense to talk about a european security architecture today? well, it does always say makes more sense to talk about using it than to changing it. and honestly, i mean, we lack a lot in europe. we like a lot in the democratic world, but we show that what we didn't really have and just give an example the day before, the invasion, the full scale invasion i was in helsinki raw, the accidental actually own having a talk to, to finish president saline minister and we were obviously, we didn't know what going to happen. 4 o'clock in the morning after we did discuss that the needed risk was there of what we did discuss was actually the other risk. will we stay united with the european union countries stay united or will there be serious divisions between countries? and even more, will we stay united with the us or will these had

a well known differences that we had had in the previous years? will they be kind of so obvious and just to state the obvious we, we did stay united and we still do one year later. so i think there are no, we have to see all the problems, but also see what we have managed to do. and i have extremely big respect for, for, for ukraine's. i wasn't here 2 days ago and for them saying that you do deliver weapons. but you do liber weapons too late to reluctantly, instead of doing it earlier, more decisive. but nevertheless, there is a structure architecture. we are using it, we are showing that when we are being put to the tests, we actually do deliver as well. i think so far so good. but that doesn't at all answer the, the long term questions you have, you have access to yourself and us. and, and then you follow up and sort of beginning to zoom into some of these issues. and in particular the, the economic part of this puzzle. now, can me reflect

a little bit about, again, you know, looking ahead to that a great day in which our russians defeated. here we are thinking about economic reconstruction. and in particular, what role do you think that we as appears i should be plain, as opposed to the united states, are the players multilateral backs. and if we are to do the heavy lifting on this, should we be actually thinking now about what kind of mechanisms are should be put in place? oh, you know, a thinking about um the models that we used in the recent past. our next generation you like to think about, ah, ukraine's economic reconstruction. i mean, it's very clear that we will need to invent some mechanism to cough up with an enormous amount of money. and of course, there's also the element of russia's role in all of this. is it possible to think

about what rushes contribution to ukraine's economic reconstruction should be? were well, the obvious as would be what we actually started the work just a few days ago. we have a few 100 of billions of euro's improves and assets. and that's the very and that's not the one now somebody's part of the answer to unites on how much money is there to unite on the legal possibility, the legal frameworks to be used to actually use these money for, for, for rebuilding or reconstruction world. other for our purposes as well as so i my based believe is that we have to be i mean this is not a think tank kind of long term discussion. this is actually to have to take care of very immediate problem with very long term consequences. and also to state the obvious, if we want to keep this unity with the us very well proven yesterday,

would say you repeat unit has to prove that we are. we are extremely active in dealing with our own european affairs. not simply relying on the u. s. taking care of it for us, not at all, not at all in contrast to which quite the contrary together with us. but really be forward leaning in our european ambitions. i think in terms of, for example, the pros and assets. it's not, it's a complicated question, but it's simply needs as a clear answer as is possible because when we have that answer, we can start to operate from lice. what we would do with these monday. thank you. prime minister callous are moving on to her security, security and defense. perhaps. first her a more medium term question as to the high representative, put it and then perhaps a more long term one. on the medium term. i mean, actually over the last couple of days we've been talking quite

a lot about how our defense industry really needs to be re thought and reconfigured . and you've recently come up with a rather interesting proposal as to what role the european union are could play in this respect models on the way in which we went about cove. it coded 19 i could perhaps say a little bit about that and, and in particular, and how is it that we could ensure that we generate that consolidated demand at european level in order for industry to, to respond yes. in the room. the problem is that the, that ukraine needs ammunition, and we also need a need to replenish our stocks. and the question is, you know, in the, in the medium term, is it going to go away? the demand that we have here. one is that we have promised the nato to have this 2 percent of our g d p as a security investments. and i was actually quite surprised

a year ago to learn that there's not many fulfill this criteria that we have agreed . so, so now there is clearly the demand on this side of ukraine, but also on the side of her european countries, said that have sent to ukraine and want to, you know, also increase their own defense because the risks and the threats are higher. so why don't proposed is that we could use the same or similar mechanism like we did with the vaccines that european, in, in, oh, european countries provide funds and then european institutions, what a, you know, european piece facility would be the one to procure. and, you know, make the orders to the defense industry so that they could make the investments to actually make it faster because the russian military industry is working in 3 shifts. a rush, a's firing in a day. the monthly european production of artillery shells monthly production

and the european defense. it hasn't boosted it's production. so where is the obstacle? because clearly if you read the room in terms of the trends that are in europe, then there is cleared it to demand. and in a market economy, when there's demand, there also has to be it or it will increase the capacity. so to make it foster, to make it faster because the ukraine must be able to defend themselves to win this war so that russia goes back to their borders. and this is not possible without the ammunition. and what i'm really concerned about is the, when i talk to some of the co lakes and, and also the defense industry that has said that, you know, we don't have any orders. we actually don't have orders a big enough to boost the production to make the investments. so it seems to me

that some of the countries are still in, in the hope that it will go away. you know, we will give everything to ukraine my right now. and then ok, let's draw the line here now and stop this because it's too expensive. and i think russia is also playing on that or, or hoping for that that you will grow tired of your own initiatives and, and then you know, they, they have a lot of manpower. and as i said there may industries working in 3 shifts. so how to get through that, even. i mean, when this war ends, we see the threat are absolutely different. because, you know, everybody could see that what putin has been talking about. he's actually serious in 1925. nobody believed hitler, but he was quite open about these goes and in 2007 boot in here in this conference

was very clear about this goes. the problem was that nobody believed him, but let's believe him now as so, so that we have to make the decisions in the medium term, but also long term or absolutely. and, and in fact, connected to this is of course, the whole question. again, looking at that long term or of, of ukraine security guarantees. i mean, precisely because even in the best of circumstances it would be extremely on wise to assume that there is going to be a state of peace or what kind of security guarantees does ukraine need in order actually for that economic reconstruction to actually happen? well, um, so king, from my country's experience and not only my country better, but many her in, in a mate. so than nato is a piece project. and because we are in nato right now, we are not living through some really dark times like ukrainians are. so the only

security guarantee that is really functioning is nato and nato membership. of course, when the war is going on, i understand that many allies have, you know, it is one of the conditions of preconditions is that you don't have open conflicts . and russia knows that very well, and if we somehow agree to these grey zones, then the grey zones are a source of conflict are the of wars and it will not end as so. so the only functioning security guarantee is, is nato membership. and we'll, we'll come back to this question of, of nato membership. hi representative. let me turn her back to you now. and now we've talked about economic reconstruction. we talked about security guarantees, of course are the other fundamental leg is ukraine's democratic consolidation. and

it's very clear that i mean, this is again, even in the best of circumstances, this is going to be a real challenge. i mean, to consolidate your democracy, or in a situation in which you're going to have an aggressive neighbor. again, even in the best of circumstances in which you liberate all your territory is and where economic reconstruction precisely for that reason will continue to remain a challenge is not going to be easy and of course, and we don't have a silver bullet to this problem. but the closest we get to it is ukraine's membership in the european union. so could you perhaps give us your sense of where we are in this journey and whether you feel that there is a sufficient sense of urgency that this needs to happen and it has to happen fairly fast. well 1st of all, let me say that they completely agree with this on your plan is to proposal that we are working on that and a real work but quickly. otherwise,

there will review over when who crane belongs to do to be a new family. and it will be a member of being union definitely after what has happened after being bomb and after being killed, they did a russian away. they are doing the history is already there into being in the future. you grain will be in to be a union as hello. these will oblige us to change our rules of procedure. these will change the size and the diversity of the wood up because your brain becomes a member. many balcony countries will door also. and 1st homework to change the way we work because i cannot imagine that passing from 27366,

maybe not. but $33.00 could be possible with the roles in which we work and how we end up. so they have a homework, we handle that work and they have a d. people have homework because before the war already ukraine had a lot of problems. and we shall bought it ukraine before the war. we invested on to political and economic development of ukraine. 15000 new. well, with the war we have invested 60 emilio new but yes, from green has been transformed into the structures political, their structure, fight against corruption in real doing in the mock receipt. a vibrant economy. oh, that being bomb. well. but they will do it because they want to do it quickly and we have to accompany them. and the commission is doing at the spit,

never seen before. now is done ukraine belongs to eat up. it could have been in a different way. but now it's done, ukraine is a member also there it will be a new new need to be in family. it will be in culture. she does asian way on leaving and this has to be institutionalized. they have to do their homework, we have to accompany them and we have to prepare to receive grain. another like it or not, herman. so you have her remark on this question yet just to just chat on that. i mean, i am as we have the experience in joining your opinion and it is, i mean, it also europe's interests that all these reforms are done. nuno free market rule of law getting rid of corruption. and there's a short opportunity window that we had after egg regaining independence. that you

know, every political force literally, you know, holds hands and says that, you know, we do this difficult reforms. ukraine did it, did in 1991. they didn't do that turn around. but i can see that in ukraine right now, there is this will, there is this hope and there's the political will to really do the difficult reforms that we also need. so, so we have to use this opportunity to window because it will close after the war. it was closed because you know, the political infighting and everything will kick in and, and that's why it's very important to, to give this hope to actually believe in ukraine that they can do it created. let me just add on to that because i think the message is with son from european union right now. they are really important. there is a framework right now, there will be some kind of a what we call an oral report back on the how the criteria is being fulfilled and you in the spring. and then we'll be there,

the more formulas feedback process to in the fall in terms of ukraine. and obviously we have all heard the ukrainian ambitions this year, or as presence say to 023. so, so we shouldn't be able to misunderstand, is his, his point of view, but i think it's important. i mean, everybody can agree on the key words merit based. nobody disagrees on that because it's in a neutral way, simply says, you fulfill criterias, there are no shortcuts. you know, we take this seriously. everybody agrees. i sometimes also a way of saying merit base is a way of saying don't rush into it. be careful. take it easy and i, i don't really like that kind of the, the, the change in meaning of that i think we would need to be trustworthy in meaning what we're saying it merit based and we recognize merits, we help where we see problems and don't accept the cats 20 to kind of situation i

had a morning meeting with, with the model the president maya asunder. and i mean, obviously they are, they are being attacked by russian influence and interest not to be able to fulfill these the obligations they try to pull, feel to be able to, to, to, to have progress in the, in the membership candidate status. so we also have to invest in helping legitimate governments in being able to actually reach their goals to be able to use the are the possibilities the membership actually makes available. and i think, i think, you know, what has emerged in of a powerful way up until now from, from all 3 speakers actually is that and there is no such thing as the gray. so there are no such things as buffer states anymore. we thought that they were there, they're not there are only from tier states, and you're either on one side of the frontier or on the other side of the frontier

. and this obviously brings back this question, both of even lodgement and of nato enlargement. now looking at both, um and indeed tis do comment on both, but i'm sort of zooming in on the eel enlargement point, and this goes back to the comments that the prime minister was was making. now, of course, as we know, over the course of the last, certainly decades, ah, this is a process ad that has been on the one hand hyper politicized, aren't by specific member states that have slow down this process only started talking about it in terms of enlargement fatigue and, and then all sorts of other considerations came in and indeed what was supposed to be a merit based process that marriott became a sort of shifting goalpost and it became an excuse for enlargement not to happen. so if you could perhaps comment, firstly on this question of,

do you feel that politically and there is the sense of enlargement has actually re become a strategic imperative? i mean, is there this awareness that has consolidated amongst our member states? these questions over buffer states and our frontline states is particularly dramatic for poland. we are the only country in that you and nature, which is a neighbor of growth, ukraine, and russia. ukraine has won the roach to negotiate membership in the you by. it's amazing sacrifice. i didn't think it would be happening quite as fast if it wasn't for that. and my advice to them is, i don't think there will be shortcuts. you are not negotiating, some kind of half way deal between ukraine and the you. ukraine has

a body of laws accumulated over several decades that it will not change for you. you're actually actually cd to that deal and therefore the fastest you do it, the fossil you do it, the fossil you translate you legislation into ukrainian and pass it in your parliament the sooner you will become a member of that intellectual clarity. but the nature of the process is important for the sake of negotiations, but also important to explain to your own people that you are adjusting to something that exists already. but i want to come back to the subject of the panel, which is, is there a possibility of return to the security architecture in europe? and the word architecture for me implies rule, an aesthetic rules to columbia, and building trade rules. if you break them, the house will be at least ugly,

or it will collapse as so tragically happened in over turkey recently. and it also implies participation. architecture cannot be imposed on the apartments. and we do have o. we used to have some common rules and organizations with russia. first of all, the un and remember ukraine was a member of the u. n. in it's recognized, internationally recognized border even in soviet times. but the security council of the u. n. was meant to be the guardian of peace rather than an immunity for her breach the peace and started war of aggression. so russia is clearly in breach here. secondly, os. see,

let's remember what the basic deal was between the east and west, then that the east would lead up on the dissidence. and the westwood recognize the new post more borders in europe, rushes and breach to. and thirdly, the council of europe. where we decided after world war 2, that the way to protect national minorities was the a council of europe convention on minority rights. russia would have been perfectly in its rights to say, we don't like this particular ukrainian law on the language or the rights of russian speakers, the courts and crimea, fine, you can do that, but you mustn't invade and so what i'm saying is that the problem with ah, recovering is a sense of order of predictability and is the nature of the russian regime,

which has broken these rules. and so i don't think the architect should can be restored without change in russia. and lastly, i agree with the high representative that if you crane wins, and we do ever change our transformation in russia, that could possibly be a constitutional moment for the globe. so that our institutions, such as the security council, start better reflecting the that the change, the balance of power it had aches, of instead of back back to this question though, of that, of enlargement at it, not when needs to happen. it needs to happen fairly fast. i mean, as the prime minister was saying, you need a set of catch that momentum. it's not going to last forever. on the other hand out, we also know that even if all conditions are fulfilled and things can happen afterwards. yes, i once you do enter the european union,

so perhaps i'm flipping into the european union in our discussion. and, you know, if you, on the one hand need to accelerate an announcement process. and on the other hand, you need to make sure that those democratic standards continue to be fulfilled at once inside. what are the lessons that we should be drawing and how is it that we have to start changing internally as well in order to make this happen? well, i keep telling herb the government of poland for which i didn't vote that the best thing they could do for the membership of ukraine is to fix our polish problems with brussels. because we want western europeans to think that ukraine will be a worthy and a useful member rather than another large poor, prosperous communist country with democracy with democracy, a rule of law problems. but you know,

we're addressing it after the financial crisis when it was discovered that some countries were breaking the rules of the growth and stability parked. we've introduced the fiscal park and the peer review of budgets and of financial credibility. and we are now doing it in the rule of law it area as well. there is now a review process by the commission of rule of ra, problems in all the member states. and only that needs to happen is that countries should just a full fill the recommendations, and the, and the deal that they have voluntarily agreed. i minister, i know you wanted to write to some of these points, but let me also add a another question of concerning, how is it that we have to change internally? i mean, if this is again, there are no buffer states, there were frontier states. and so enlargement re becomes a strategic priority,

which obviously concerns ukraine, but it doesn't concern only ukraine. so here we have an enlargement process that expands considerably, at least potentially. so it is very clear that we also have to change our internal rules and all sorts of other ways. i'm given that i assume that you, your country would be in favor of that ongoing enlargement. would you also be in favor of a revision of those rules? i'm thinking of this to hear about decision making rules and in particular, qualified majority. before i answer, answer that question i wanted to reactive or dr. duke said, no, i'm listening or listening to you and, and this is, it seems to me that, you know, rush is concerned about the and is fighting for all the rights of russians except in russia has. so it is. so this is very clear, but what i wanted to add is that in terms of what he really needs,

in terms of looking around the or, or rethinking the rules and, and institutions like it after the 2nd world war, the united nations was created. definitely we need to rethink now, but one part of it is accountability. and without it we, we just can't do it. or, you know, yesterday we had discussions and, and you know, i hear that many countries except ukraine have the fear of the nuclear escalation and, and, and so that we can't al accountable put in our love for, you know, there's no international tribunal because because otherwise, you know it would be nuclear threat, but you know it, but it just can't be that those countries that have nuclear weapons are beyond the law are beyond the rules if it is so we will have the, the bar i a states that will use this because they know that nothing's gonna happen to them. so accountability in and not only the crimes war crimes,

but also leadership crime, which is the crime of aggression that can be only prosecuted by the special tribunal. and the leadership crime is the crime that all the other war crimes are stemming from. if you have no crime of aggression, you don't have war crimes either. but that's just a comment coming to your question. i mean, going back a, you know, european enlargement at 1st it was 6 states and, and, you know, every time in, it's the discussion that we can work with a bigger group and, you know, for a small country that didn't have a voice for 50 years, it is very important that we have a voice now that we are actually listen to around the table. so when we hear the talks about, you know, qualified majority out, we hear that, okay. we are again,

in that thread that we, we don't have a voice and, and that is the risk. how we sit. if we have, you know, and we have problems with it, you know, certain certain issues. so far we have managed to make decisions even during this hard time of war, this year aware we have in united and we have done the decisions a necessary decision. so i wouldn't throw the baby out with the bathwater really because it has so many, you know, positive sides for countries or like like mine, small countries that didn't have a voice when we were occupied. i see that i also see the way in which other member states have been using and abusing her. i see that and, and we have to, you know, of course discuss this how we can, you know, use some tools so that if you do this, then you know,

there are consequences. so you have to really make, make the calculations there. but it's, it's just just giving that, you know, there's a qualifying majority and we will do those decisions without you will just mean that, that you will leave out part of europe. and that would actually also create instability . if a for everybody does not have a se, but i guess earth constant trade offs and i basically agree. but on the other hand, if you start at the end what, what do we have to be able to do? and i would say 2 things and i realized every member's state doesn't agree with the 1st is actually how to crate and how to cultivate the trans atlantic relations. i mean, have a decision making process that makes you repeat, union compatible with, with us in the long run. i think that is extremely important. i think nothing has shown that more the last year than, than the war in ukraine. so every tendency to say that without neglecting at all,

the integrity of europe or the, the, every tendency to say, well, well, this shows that you are makes, we can make it on our own. and that's simply not, not correct. so the other one is actually to, to be able to face china basically, and a lot of different, very legitimate views on that. but we need to be able to cooperate on the how to meet react to face, contradict china. and according to me, do with that hand in how with us, because otherwise we will have a very complicated world where the u. s. has one position the you tries to find one position, and china will try to outsmart us. so i think that the stream be important to under so what, what is the purpose of what we're doing in a broader geopolitical context that back to this question of so, you know, here we are, we all love enlargement are great, but not everyone wants to enlarge so there are

a number of very important european countries that prefer staying outside. so perhaps prime minister and incident. could you give us your sense of, you know, i'm obviously here talking about the norway turkeys united kingdoms. i've that as well. ah, now here we have a european political community, and could you give us your sense of how much truly, how much value add to it, or can such a for him actually provide honesty, hard to say, i would say a, on the other hand, let's test it in later this spring, i mean, if you ask, i will w in france, i will say he's a huge importance. obviously it's so it's a, it's a framework for cooperating with, with countries that are, are in different ways, very, very, very near by us in geographic sense, but also in, in terms of ambition. so we actually literally discussed that the, the upcoming meeting in her, in world, over and other for them. it's a huge importance. i think it's

a way of signaling also our without any promises ahead. but of course it's very different. it's a way of also having extremely close connections with, with other countries that, you know, i mean, obviously the euclidean will go over in different positions. but what the, you need to have organized waste to cooperate with countries that are, are very close to us. i represented, let's turn now to the question of european defense. now i think this last year has in many respects, kind of really highlighted a contradiction. so on the one hand, we take defense more seriously and european defense. and you highlighted this has actually made some pretty remarkable steps forward over over the last year on the other hand. and we still had a major problem when it comes to defense fragmentation. and the steps forward that have been made in that respect are not particularly impressive. and on top of that,

you could also make the argument there actually the last year, and this goes to also the trans atlantic dimension took to all of this over the last year. our defense dependence on the united states has massively increased. so here we are on the one hand taking defense more seriously and european defense more seriously. on the other hand, our dependence on the united states increasing and this doesn't particularly make for a great recipe for the future of the trans atlantic relationship, where i think there's interest actually on both sides of a more balance partnership. so how do we kind of reconcile that contradiction as a meeting with that? that just got me question. look, it does nothing, neil ne, dawn east do guarantee of totally dorian,

defense of you know, it has been it. these it will be and no body pretend to substitute denature. natal is the alliance that dang sure to rhetorical defense of europe. it doesn't prevent due to being member to state to develop capacity dis, you know, the do 1st be a better partner of nato. and 2nd, to have the capacity to act by themselves when needed. they're not either all, he's not nato or he to be in defense. it's nature guarantee, as you said, or did we tauriel defense of youtube bloss member to stays taken seriously. not more cd usually seriously, because in the past they haven't taken seriously. what does it mean to be an

independent estate and to have defense capability space, an economic crisis makes military expenditure variable of budget adjustment. and that white with unhappy stock bias because the military was the adjustment variable, ledger expenditure lead military expenditure with or needed widow needed. there is no war and our boldness. yes, we send from is be this union, this a hail and other parts of africa? yes, we use some rapid than google military intervention, like in libya, but at high intensity war into the state war, mobilizing 1000 people, hundreds of 1000 of people and using capacity is that ad cheap and can be destroyed . a lot of them every day. it was out of our imagination. now it's part of our reality. so good news. we are increasing this capacity. germany. i don't know

when, but 100000 1000000 elders fallen increase into full bones of g d. b. da bill of native standards. bolen is increasing their military capacity as any one who knew them, but have a look at france. when they look at the new law for military financing in france, they go from 39 to 59. billions. that's an incredible 40 percent. maybe they don't tell that betty loudly, but this is an increased 40 percent 40 percent on the immediate daddy's pain. did your friends show france germany bowling and others? it is the clear feeling that we need to rearm. i'm sorry. what i'm saying that people tell me all you want to mediate that as you would up. no, a one you have to be able to fulfill their responsibilities. insane. they don't 1st

and when nato will not that be able to react when needed. and they insist is not either all is natal bless you to being capacity to increased the strands of need to and to be able to be at reliable and powerful barna. and this is the duty of the aid rep, not only for for a policy, but for security and defense. don't forget it. and that way on the next defended ministers in sweden and the 6th and 7th of march. we will be put on the table. we are in war mote. urgent war mote shall react quickly. we have the means and doors. and at the end, you know, we talk about reconstruction, which is great. which is the big, the g m. b of you grain. 150 billions. $150.00 billions

that she bowes a capital income ratio of one 3rd. and let you pause that the capital gray has been destroyed by one 3rd. we are still on one hand, it on 50000000000 for reconstruction. this is one 5th, one 5th of the next generation blank. this is one fif of what we have mobilized to face the go bit. so please have an idea of the dimensions of their problem in order to see what we are talking about. so eve will europeans, one, they can re arm and by the way, my fingers coming from the work of the to be in defense agency may figure says that the next 2 years, you to be a members estates planned to spend 70 billions more for their capacities which is the problem of media natalie, that if we do eat every one on its corner,

multi plane but its its own capacities without any kind of coordination, we will increase our duplicity and we will not feeling a, what loopholes so it's spend more, it's on the way a spend better by a spending together still not. and is not just buying them when it's, you know, together that's quite dizzy. important thing is to decrease their number of different doors that the autumn is half and make them more endurable. and it is on a task that was yes. okay. yeah, agreed on the books. and now we have to be up pray. yardi d o. do be annually up. bra yadi it. if not, we are going to waste a lot of taxpayer money. i agree. and as i think i know you wanted to react on this and perhaps on top of that, and before we open up the turn to the floor, if i could just ask you

a final question or so, i mean about one thing that we, oddly, i haven't actually talked about very much vicious relationship with russia. ah, you know, so they're having a whole discussion on the future european security architecture without addressing this question. and of course it's, there's an obvious reason why we're not addressing it. we don't really know what russia we're talking about um, but perhaps again before we open it up to the floor at long side reacting to anything you want to react to. if you could perhaps comment on that question as well. show up. we had a process of negotiating, a partnership with corporation agreement with russia. there was a, a, a monday for the commission. um, and it was pretty detailed, pretty advanced. we could have had an association agreement with ukraine and an association agreement with russia. it was russia that decided she was no longer interested in, i think 2011 vladimir putin decided that he would build an old anita rival

euro. i c h, ec union that will then negotiate with brussels as an equal, and he needed ukraine in his multinational project. this. so this was russia's decision and russia can change it. this is, of course not the current one, not the current leadership, because with them you can't make a deal because they're completely non credible. but on european defense, i've lost my voice asking the question in the european parliament, what has to happen in the europe, in, in the periphery of europe, for you to take the fence seriously. and as a history to it, you know, after the balkan wars, we pledged ourselves to have a rapid reaction force. i think it was meant to be 70000 troops. nothing happened. then we had the battle groups. useless. now at least we have a budget. it's wonderfully,

it's wonderfully called piece facility from which we're actually buying arms for you. great, good. thank you. high rep for noticing that poland is basically doubling its defense expenditure, but this is really unfair. so poland is going to be defending much richer countries, further west that are spending much less. so spending some of that money through the european budget to which we contribute in proportion to g d. p would be farrah and americans should be really pleased if we do that because they have a challenge elsewhere. and if we can deal with lower order threats in north africa, or perhaps, i don't want to speculate but lower order threats on our own. that's good. that helps to, to relieve some of the burden that they have, but we need to get serious. it takes money without the upon their make the,

the european defense budget would have been $14000000000.00 euros instead of 7. but it's still not enough. i mean, the fence is really expensive and also we have misconstrued pasco, originally when bernard cautionary and i signed the 1st letter to kathy austin, at my house in poland. it was meant to be an a vanguard project. only 4 countries that are really willing to do that with joint rules of engagement with a joint command with a joint threat assessment. and it's become a political project at the lowest, the lowest speed at but this was before the war. we now have to get real we, we really need to go over to more time leadership because these things take a decade to construct defense capabilities. if we don't start right now,

we'll still be defenseless in 10 years time. okay, let's open this up. question over here. thank you very much. alexa, going to rank a member of the parliament of ukraine. i want to continue your line and i have a question to hi, representative burrell and prime minister collis. my question is about russia and did the question is we're speaking now about european architecture of security. but if russia as empire still exists, it will be like a fortress on the walls of we shut the gates is stain barbarians. so the question is not just to defeat russia today, but to damper allies, russia to change russia, and that is possible, like we saw it in history. spanish empire does not exist anymore roster, hungarian in pile. so who benefit it is here in munich? i think that's the most, but with the best place to speak about it, who benefited more than germans in the fact that now german empire does not exist,

but there is free, wonderful country. so is these epo do there you are? does europe need polish thing to dam, paralyzed? russia? not just to change, put answers into temporal as russia to change it in order to really have a secure europe. thank you. the question that needs to be addressed is the accountability regarding russia as well . i mean a, as after the 2nd world war, there was an airbag tribunal and there was a tolkien drive in the what nazi crimes were widely condemned across the world. and the effect of the nuremberg tribunal was that actually german people got to know about the crimes that the nazis committed. and hence, you know, there is the change in a mindset that there has been no such thing in russia. so they are defining themselves through the empire, really a being the masters of that empire. and if people admire dictators,

there is no obstacle in, in becoming one or submitting to one. so how to really, you know, tackled that cycle is said that history matters. i mean, our history books were written after we regained our independence to reflect all the crimes that were committed. it was not the same for russia. they are teaching and learning from the soviet history books. so the accountability is it is of utmost importance for the crimes of aggression really to have, you know, the, the understanding also within a russian society and, and also maybe the contemplation bear without it. i don't think it's possible question hearing referred for how sorry, high representative discipline is still a deep. she'll shoot cold to little question. russia. russian like

disappear. but you may change which russia booted russia, which russia. gotcha that window war aku. like even make a grain. the 2nd builders on russia that defeat is being defeated and maybe they could be internal political changes. i don't know, but i can say the same thing about us, which us biting us of a drum us. what would have happened with drum in the white house would be in the same situation. no, show us russia, which us and which russia is very premature to start thinking on the security to catch up your b would up when we are in the middle of the wall. and depending on the result of the war, the situation will be completely different. so let's concentrate our efforts on winning this war. a bet. keeping the door open to peace at any moment. it but it

goes, i mean, parallel lay. i mean, if we think that let's concentrate on the war and not think about what comes after . then when the war is over, nobody talks about accountability anymore because it's done, let's move on data and then it just repeats itself all over again. we have seen this in history, so we have to do it parallel. we have to talk about the accountability. now we have to work with the accountability now, so that we would have sustainable peace in the future that the imperialistic dreams that, that the russians have. and i'm not talking about putin, not putin, it's, it's the, it's the nation and what is in it. i mean, what are they celebrating really being the empire, not really. you know, we have to cut the cycle all that, but that will, these have all these pair that all the story capella's, the empty, lots of crests in a dead end. but i mean, everybody says on your chin of research,

i mean, no, no chance of china group come and liberal democracy. well, you can argue them what, what happened with japan would have with south korea. it's very possible actually to create a stable, well working democracies. you have to have a long term view, but a very practical approach in the short trauma crested herron in the federal. yep. thank you, alex on the look. ah, it was for the last 3 days last was said to balt, supporting ukraine. i'm. i'm actually was with the army since since 1st day of the war and on the recent to left it. so allow me to make a very brief and intervention as well as well before you ask a question. but of course, i would like to thank you for your support. i know what it means to start the war was kalashnikov your hand and see how your capability is improving with every months when you receive support from mom from august and partner. so thank you for that. ah, i also happened to be a minister of finance during the war since 2015. and i can tell you that it was

very, very difficult. the national national security, if we were spending for defense up to 6 percent of our g, b was very, very difficult. it sought so expensive, but i felt that were run out of time when you to prepare. so i hear also a lot during this conference. it is expensive to support ukraine, but i think the right approach to it. ukraine spent 6 percent was a lot. now it's about 60 percent. so not a dispos spent 60 percent. right. is better to pay now. ah, more in a glad that in all the, the re, armand and there is some voices that we need to union actually invest more into this. so and the european union has its advantage. you know, nate, that allows to share expenses, we couldn't good. so a 2nd, it was a point about ukraine, what was going to happen after? right. and whether that is the time for the forms now will often i believe there

will be a short window for the forms after the war. but now it is open. when not moldova, russia is what intervening blocking anything. it's time now to change ukraine, the best time. now for this. and then the last one about security guarantees. ah, look also the birth and fears that irrational may break up and at great enormous for every one. first of all, i think don't you think that you control this rushes, unpredictable. something may change their without you willing on, not willing, you know, it's, it's uncontrollable. so i think if wouldn't billy so you want to use this argument that look, if i'm not there, it will be a mess in russia. it will be a leverage over europe over nato. so i think nathan used to accept this accept this belief, i said is the reality and then plan accordingly. are you up to the task? are you ready for that or not?

and lot think about versus nicer. anxious. ah, the best security guarantee for burson, who was on the frontline, is but a phrasing, marcus, cutter, russia, the length test. now let me start actually taking more questions because i've got many, i'm going to try and bring in as many people as possible. it. yeah. present to rose back. my name is hans, that's put in managing director of the federation of job defense, security, defense industry. i have a question to the high representative. you impressively argued in favor of a strong defense industry in europe. thank you. however, the same time the you commission is driving a green deal, which is employing financial market actors as transformation a agents. and then the financial market for sustainability is widely perceived as being in contradiction to armament and weapons. so for example,

the state bank of bavaria has cancer that business relationship with amerman companies just because they had more than 20 percent turnover and armaments even supplying the bundeswehr or armed forces. so my question is, what we're and when we're the you commission finally give a strong signal to those financial actors that they perceive armament for our armed forces in the you and nato as a prerequisite for sustainability. thank you. i will bet your question to make a legion to commission. i think it's partial directly. we are saying, on that day you have been talking with many people of the defense industry asking for these taxonomy to be mailed in order to take into account at the defense industry. it's an important part of our batch political system that we did. and thank god to remember that the way to proposal oliver put in to defend industry as

a non sustainable and then negative level and say that taxonomy is what avoided. but certainly we had to rebuild the way we see and the defense industry can and the kind of right needs to know what the left hand is doing. right, in sweden we have, we had a very short lived discussion in sweden on how to exclude defense industry investments from says from sustainability. that discussion died at the 24th of february. and there's one more issue there is some politicians are telling us that yes we, we need more ammunition. we need more equipment. but there are these procedures. don't believe it. as defense, men as di, board, plenty of equipment, plenty of ammunition. i believe every country in europe has a clause that if you have an urgent operational need, you can do it without tenders. you can just go and buy it and give the contracts.

what is more urgent operationally than winning the war in ukraine's absence? and there was a question at the back fence. yeah. lady at the back. thank you. my name is lisa escal, member's, ukraine, parliament. and i want to reflect on what i just heard about ukraine. a membership in or in the, you know, when i hear that the president announced, he said it should be 2023 and then the reflection from and the conclusion from the e. u. i want to tell you that it's not the president's zalinski position. only he speaks the majority of the voice of ukrainian people and ukrainian people don't understand that there are procedures. they don't understand that there are chapters in the rules. you know, today it's 2023. but 9 years ago it was 2014 and i together

with thousands of ukraine's we were standing at your on my done. and now we sometimes when dont remember that in my life i'm 32. i already had serrita revolutions for the european values. and i am seeing this to day because i'm very happy when the radix of course, he says that there it, when there is a urgency for defense, we can, on the e. u membership also for ukraine, because ukraine young people know that we are a part of europe and they will not understand when in some of the conclusions they'll be an old chapters of and the chapters of different rules and the rules please. let's make that special procedure. let's make it fast. because this is something that ukraine young people are fighting for, for many, many years. and for us it's not economic corporation. it's our existential choice that we made a long time ago. not this year or during the war, and i want you to remember that. thank you. and we'll go back to this question.

have, should we have a special procedure for ukraine? but let me go to john, exactly here at the front row. john shipman of the international institute for strategic studies. so i have what the french call a default national professional. i was just speaking to mr. amier. have you selena here about this strategic issue. we've talked about european security architecture and european military capacities, but insufficiently, about reviving a properly strategic culture. in the cold war, we had 2 principles in nature. one was flexible response. the other was escalation dominance. in this conflict we've seen sequential response, an intramural escalation, fear. we had talk more about how frightened we might be about escalation than put in the mind of the opponent in moscow, a great fear of escalation. it beamed strategically, illiterate,

our intramural dialogue, these last 11 months. defense is not escalation offensive. weapons are needed for counter attack. counter attack is needed for defense. ukraine has the u. n. article $51.00 right to defend itself. every one else had the same. you an article, 51 right to assist it. ukraine's non membership of nato is strategically irrelevant . the european secured, he order has been challenged. like the middle east, one with challenge when iraq invaded kuwait to wait, had no defense agreement with any one of the 50 plus countries that came to kuwait . people came to kuwait because they knew the next thought might be saudi arabia and that would be the end of whatever middle east dakota order lie. so can i appeal to our prime minister cutty colors and others including red deck to continue to remind people that there are some lessons from the cold war that we probably forgotten and others strategic muscle memory that we haven't sufficiently revived.

let's have strategic thinking, as well as debate her till mercy this o m. i cover him. thomas of his former president of estonia and various other things. i asked the participants to explain their personal belief and how serious the european union is about and large men to ukraine. given that we have heard here and for a long time, on the one hand that east europeans are hawks warmongers from western europeans. and then we hear on the other hand that we have to take into account the historical experiences of the global south. but we have the historical experiences of the mother of the prime minister of estonia, who was deported as a 6 month old. but we don't want to hear the historical experiences of the palsy. estonians is the european really serious about bringing in another 44000000

people have had experiences with the behavior of russia. when we hear from the same podium and have heard throughout the past year about how the east europeans are hawks and warmongers. i mean, are you serious? i met my question. the are it, are you series that the european union really wants to include more of us who have had ex, empirical experience with russia to, to, to actually prick the balloon of believe about drugs, barnett rod of and the wonderful culture of tolstoy. and thus they have ski so just that, are we serious? and if we are serious, are we ready to rethink our procedures in order to demonstrate our seriousness? i didn't know it was going to be a debate allowed, his largest demand

a was prepared to discuss about the security architecture that you politically rudo and about how to fazed a war about enlargement. i have nothing more to say that what they do be and leaders at the highest possible level upset rather than the commission loopy and cancel. and all leaders of that would be a new member to state. what can i get? they said clearly they engaged, they do, they did the procedures as quick as possible, the procedures as the lead done, imagine a system without procedures, they are there. they have to be fulfill is not my especially the day the rules and weight of the larger men. but all it been leaders here and out of this room have been saying once and again that ukraine and moldova,

late, the ga will remember so that a be a union and the process is open. but don't expect it to be done of it a night without any kind of fulfilling some requirements. and in fact, part of the point is actually there, if there is requirements on that, then there is that democratic consolidation which is kind of the purpose of the whole exercise, right. thank you. how to point on this. this is a wonderful moment and thank you thomas, because a year ago exactly. here are suppose hawks were saying he's going in and the supposed realists were saying he's bluffing. well, who was right. and what we require is a don't want to noise us any more. and be, since you didn't listen to us when we were saying and before, listen to us now on enlargement. this is,

this is going to be interesting and difficult because there is a pressure from below, from the population for debate. but of course, including ukraine will lower the average wealth in the european union. so some countries will become net contributors earlier, for example, poland. and we don't mind but it will also change the balance of power inside the european ukraine will have 60 emmy peas. ah, the european union will be rebalance, not everybody will welcome that. and the question of timing is, of course, very interesting. we have to distinguish this as spaniards here. it my rights in remembering that spain was the last country that was admitted into the you 1st. and then had a transition period to to accept the,

a key community care bright. and then sweden already had to do the pre accession. but you know, we could, we could make an exception and go to the previous system, have a political membership 1st. and then open one area of integration up to another, a at a pace that both ukraine and, and europe can sustain this. it, it would only take a will i want to take to final questions as charles grant has been very patient there at the back. but, but oh, i tant, yep. charles charles, grandstand, virginia foreman, london. we haven't talked very much about the old french concept to strategic autonomy in the area of defense today is not such a popular idea and i gather in particularly in places like the baltic countries in poland. obviously in the life of the war, given the incredible importance of the u. s. defense link now, but my question is this, if somebody like donald trump or somebody close to him,

comes back to being president of the united states. again, other europeans gonna start talking about european strategic autonomy again in the area of defense and linked to that. if they do start to talk about strategic autonomy. sure. do they think that that will they think that the british need to be part of it to make it stronger and more effective or taught strategic autonomy? thank you, charles. there was a hand there at the back that i don't, i ain't dale. exactly. thank you. not any hannah, my mind, member of the defense committee of the european parliament. so please allow me to take the discussion also back to the issue of you defense. because despite the russian aggression, i feel like we are stuck in a groundhog day discussion. here we are talking you p and strategic autonomy, your pin sovereignty for 56 years after the russian aggression european defense agency wanted to check on the member states capability gaps that they are supposed

to report to the european union. just to find out almost non date. now you are sharing an ace. i shall this assessment, mister boyle, dad, the member states are growing the defense budgets. yes. but they are still not coordinating or new level. so they were spam side by side. they would even run into competition and pay more for less that they get. so what does it need? and we have, i mean, 2 people from the member states, i was on the poor gym if the russian aggression is not enough. what does it need for us to really work on is you defense? which means giving up nation serenity and moving it to that you level and not just talk, talk, talk her so very final comments from our panel. let me just take it into an addict. let me start with you while i couldn't agree more with the speaker. it really, we are past the are we,

we are behind the curve. we are also on the line in one of her a, one of her state of the union speeches asked the member states, do you want to get serious about the fence? and it really is the council. it's the member states that have to make the transition, get serious and get, get it done. i represent a, you agree, but between saying and doing that is the little difference. defense becomes the competence of the member estate defense has not been communities is not a community competence. let's remember that we at the commission, we can claim, but there will be one. but defense issa it, member estate competence. we can push, you can support, but that the n,

it's the concealed the member to state decision. and yes, we have to push for it and we do, and we advance. but michael doesn't exist. so if you believe that tomorrow, all members of stage will agree on a common defense investment. saudi is not going to happen. what we can do step by step, the better integration, go to the nation into to put ability of our arms, and that's what we're doing. and we have a lot of work done. don't dismiss to work that has been done. but don't ask for my to coach defense remains. i strong, they mention of the national civil rain dick and the armies are powerful tools with identities and to make them to become a single one working in accordance with the rules coming from a kind of a community. it's not going to happen tomorrow, but we can do

a lot in order to make them spend better by your spending together in several fields. it's so long process to we know crane is certainly a big consent if arab is being done on the crisis. that right, and these great, it will make us to react and to assume a responsibility because it is that they look autonomy, known it because they, nato, was there. no nato is there, it will be, there is something that we need and nobody's questioning. but these war has to represent than awakening for the member to state. to spend better, to spend more, to have more military capability, is more interoperable. being a stronger part of nato and being a stronger in order to work when nato will not be there. so did you something that the we have to claim once and again, digital crisis, digital opportunity we have to break to was we broke a lot could have said before,

the war that did would be a new new would be a spending ethiopian money altogether to give arms to our country being attack frankly, don't be so pessimistic and so negative. there is not a lot of work to do, but we have doing a lot and we will do much more because this war will be a big incentive for doing that. prime minister grisome. well, i think the last year has, has kind of teach does that the most relevant version all. so to speaks to g dig autonomy is actually for european countries to, to invest more in our own countries defense and thereby show the americans that we are really partners in this. i think that's a most obvious lesson learned in terms of autonomy that is cooperation. prime minister, candace, if i have a few points it, oh, so on other topics on,

on strategic ed toner, me, i agree that 1st we should all meet and really do in reaction deeds and you know, investing in the 2 percent the 2 percent of g d p should be absolute minimum. so when those who are talking about it, she dos as show it not thing words, but actually deeds that, you know, we raised our autonomy by being more able to defend. oh, so ourselves. and that requires investment to defense m regarding m regarding the accession process it, you know, there is this a set of reforms that is required and it is also the basis of prosperity. i mean, free market rule of law to make investors trust your economy, your system and, and, and then it is also necessary to do this reform. so that of the country could,

could develop to the level where the other countries are and, and there is a convergence between the countries that already are in european union and who's g d, p and well being of people is better at so it is needed for both sides, but also for the european side it's, it's a but we hear that, you know, it's necessary for ukraine, but it's actually also necessary for us that are, you know, internal market this baker. then the old region is more secure because it's dependent on the demand, dement of values that we share. and oh, what does thomas asked? yes i, i remembered the 24th of february very well when we had the meeting go. so with other prime ministers who were quite shocked, i heard so many times that we were naive. we should have listened to you. and now

i hear this that ok, you know, we are the adults in the room. i mean, not leave the but again, those countries who said that we would know eventually listen to, we know better now. and my question is, why do you think, you know better now when, when you didn't know before and why to we really try to use the same a, you know, track that, that was used before. that didn't work. we have, you know, the, every next time, every next time russia takes a bolder step every next time it's bigger. so we have to cut the cycle. and i really, really pleased that we are being listened to. because i know not many european countries understand that we all have our skin in the game, but some of us more than the others. and, and if i hear from countries that have much better neighbors than we do and that

they are afraid of the nuclear escalation. i mean, believe me, if there is no clear escalation, it will be on ukraine. it will be on those countries and not at countries in the middle of europe. so if they are not afraid, so shouldn't be germany, france, other countries that are really, really much further away from this war. thank you. well, thank you very much. my minister, thank you to old panelists. i think the bottom line to this last hour and a half has been if you're serious about the long term, be it in terms of security of the economy, of, of democracy to, to be a far greater urgency. now said thank you very much for this great discussion. thank you. all right, you are just seeing images there from the munich security conference at where there was a panel discussion titled back to the future visions for the european security architecture

. we had the e u ag commission, the vice president under the u. s. foreign affairs chief ed. you're set barrell kai, a callous to prime minister of estonia along with oath christus and the prime minister of sweden. and there's a little bit of a change actually because it was the former polish foreign minister, ruddock, gassy corky, and he's also an amy p who was part of that discussion. many topics covered among them. you enlargement, obviously very much centered around the war in the ukraine. russia's war in ukraine at with european defense as spending and cooperation taking a central role in that discussion. and what we're gonna do now is we're gonna cross down to munich, where we have our chief international editor, richard walk error is zach richard walker standing by 1st there. hi richard. you were following that very closely at the security conference. what did you make of

the panel back to the future visions for the european security architecture, which just ended yeah. public. whether there was no flood of ground covered, and i guess it's really kind of europe sort of dealing with the wake up hold. a rush's invasion of ukraine has dealt to the constantly in terms of how to think about defending itself in the future. if you bear in mind that, i mean this invasion has really sort of shaken europe to, it's cool that the presumption that there wouldn't be another major war between russia and western european who says that this was, this was something that was completely out of the question. since the end of the cold war, the prospect of that is now reared its head again with russia, its invasion and fears that if russia succeeded in ukraine, then it could try to,

to, to move further to try to reconstitute what used to be the russian empire so to speak, and just to like pick out a couple of the quotes that we heard during the course of that panel. are from the u. s. foreign policy chief morale, for instance. he said we are in war mode. we are in urgent war mode. saying that it's essential for europe to do a series of things to, to really get is defense in order. and with the most irks in that saying being providing ukraine with ammunition that at ukraine's literally running out of ammunition to fire back against the russian forces. and this has a huge of domino effect right through a european defense in europe. europe's defense industry in order to kind of provide enough ammunition. but that's just the 1st step. europe needs to think about the expansion of the european union. it needs to think about expansion of nato things in organizations that ukraine wants to join,

and also other countries wants to join to an awful lot covered in this, in this last arrow. so i'm sure we can drill down to a few aspects of it. that's right, richard, plenty to add to to, to look out there and you've touched on some of those main topics. now the estonian prime minister kayak alex was a participant and in this panel and she mentioned death that small countries need a voice. she was also quite direct in, in what she was saying and that, that, you know, essentially at, they had been warning that this was a possibility and that, that was their, you know, the 3rd, their voice wasn't essentially heard. tell us a little bit of booking button, what you felt at your impressions of, of the estonian prime minister k house. and what she had to say. what i've proposed is that we could use the same or similar mechanism like we did with the vaccines that you know, european union, our european countries provide funds and then european institutions were a, you know, european piece facility would be the one to procure. and, you know,

make the orders to the defense industry so that they could make the investments to actually make it faster. because the russian military industry is working in 3 shifts. a rush is firing in a day. the monthly era p and production of an artillery shells month, a product. all right, richard actually be heard there from the estonian prime minister kayak hollis. so tell us, as i said before, what, what were your impressions of what you have to say? and cuz she did mention a lot about a european defense spending, and in general you enlargement. so what did you think? yeah, yeah. so, i mean, not just estonia but, but these baltic states have taken on, you know, really influential ro within europe. since this invasion of began, just remember these a states that used to be a part of the soviet union, they became independent after the breakup of the soviet union. the early 19

ninety's and their states have since joined nato and the european union and their estate, their states that, that really feel that they have learned the lessons of dealing with russia. that the threat that russia potentially poses. and that they were warning long before this war happened about this threatened dave field, the western european countries, the most influential ones, for instance, germany and france ignored dogs to those threats. didn't take them seriously enough . now they're here saying essentially we told you, so we told you that russia was a threat, and this can be an awful lot more that we're gonna have to do now. so in that case, she's talking about, you know, the need for european, europe's defense industries, really rally to tackling this trouble. this problem that we just mentioned, of providing ammunition to ukraine. but also it takes on a bigger dimension when looking at, at, at, at fair distribution of defense spending within europe. now,

we know defense spending has been a long standing argument between the united states and europe. you remember donald trump complaining bitterly that europe was basically a free rider on american defense. so you've seen european country since this was saying we're, we're going to start stepping up to our defense spending. but those countries in eastern europe, so the baltic states, but also poland wanted a wanting to ramp up their defense spending even further because they see the threat as being particularly acute, given that they're right up against russia in the way that they feel it. and i want to pick up on one thing, the rhetoric she caused. you mentioned there, the form of how the foreign minister said, he said the poland is looking to pretty much double is defense spending. so beyond as a proportion of its, of its economic output. well beyond anything that germany or other western european countries are planning. and he said, what is this really fair? poland base of sandwich between ukraine to the east and germany to the west. by pushing up his defense spending like that is effectively spending more money than

germany to protect germany. that was his implicit case. there are spending more to protect countries that are much richer than it. so this going to be a, did this is we're still in the relatively early stages of this, of, of kind of fantasy within, within europe in terms of defending europe and deferred the resources going into european defense a debate. it was traditionally between the u. s. in europe and it's all now really sort of opening up within europe to in the face of this challenge. and there's plenty of discussions i think care and plenty of analysis that definitely going to be taking place. i thank you. richard. t w's chief international editor richard walker at the munich security conference. all right, so you are watching at the job you use. we have been covering the munich security conference and will be bringing you coverage throughout the day of that all the

goings on there in munich, and we'll be back again at the top of the next hour. so do keep up to date on all that i just use our website, w dot com. you can follow us as well on our youtube account and on social media to pop up audience. jared read will be here from the top with a.