 Hello, good afternoon, welcome. Welcome to this broadcasting, organized by the University of Barcelona, European Observatory of Memories, relations between Russia and Ukraine. This is a talk with Oxana, and Manel Alias, and before starting, I would like to highlight that we are broadcasting into YouTube channels, the one by Foundation Solidaritat. You will find the content in Catalan and in the one of European Observatory of Memories, the same content in English. We will divide our talk into parts, and we'll give the floor to each one of our guests to explain their perspectives and experience related to this relationship between Russia and Ukraine. We are going through a very tense moment, we are very lucky because Manel is right now at Moscow, so he can provide us firsthand information. And before starting, I would like to give the floor to Dr. Raul Ramos, who is the Vice Dean of International Policies of the University of Barcelona. He will address us a few words and welcome all of us to the conference. Good morning Raul, good morning Pao, good morning everybody. I will start my intervention by highlighting that the University of Barcelona is a university committed with two basic principles, which is part of their statutes, which is the culture of peace and the social and human power based on human rights. I believe that all these principles are within what we call the basis of the activities of the Solidaritat Foundation activities, the Department of the University of Barcelona in charge of implementing tangible actions. So I believe that the UB and the Foundation could not be apart from such a complex situation such as the one we are witnessing tension between Russia and Ukraine. This is the worst situation in Europe of this century, and we are obliged to reflect about the conditions in which it's possible to maintain security, peace and to contribute to European democracy continues to be a tangible value. The European Union and the different member states share these democratic values. So I would like to highlight that this is the main reason for organizing this meeting. I would like to thank the experience of the European Observatory of Memories, a program by the Solidaritat Foundation UB Center in this reflection about peace democracy fighting for freedom that has already happened in our recent past. And we see you to the increase of populism and the different situations is in danger. So I would like to thank Chavier Lopez in a very specific way, his role in organizing this conference and also for giving me the opportunity to address you a few words. This is one of my first conference as Vice-Trees Dean. I would like to wish you a very fruitful conference. I hope you can spend this time with our guests. And I hope that the situation we're going through can improve and does not evolve towards the most pessimistic scenarios that we have. Thank you very much. And I hope you have a very fruitful conference and exchange. Well, thank you very much Raul for addressing us this welcoming words. We're very happy to organize this conference and we are happy to count on different personalities and journalists who can shed some light on a conflict that comes from far away, but which is going through a very complex situation. Geopolitics seem to be a very central role. Good morning, Manel. I would like to greet you. Good morning. I would like to introduce Manel Elias, who is a journalist of TV3 at Moscow and author of the Russia, the biggest scenario of the world. So I would like you to invite to address us a few words and to remind the audience that they can use the chat in order to ask us questions, write comments, observations, and we would like to respond as much as possible because we are facing a very complex context. Manel, you have the floor. Okay, thank you very much for inviting me. I would like to explain to you, first of all, something which can help us to understand how Vladimir Putin contemplates Ukraine because I think this concept is key in order to understand what's going on there. When I arrived at Moscow, I'm living in Moscow temporarily, I don't live on a permanent basis, but I arrived here in 2015, right after the conflict with Ukraine started back in 2014. And of course, one of the things that I would like to highlight about Moscow when you arrive here is the Kremlin. The Kremlin, it's medieval fortress, it's overwhelming, beautiful, and it's a patrimony of humankind. One year later, in 2016, very close to the Kremlin, I remember that Putin inaugurated in a very long way a huge statute which broke the profile of the Kremlin. It was some Vladimir's statue and some Vladimir, I remember they have a similar statute in Ukraine because it dates from 1853, St. Vladimir reigned a thousand years ago, and he was the princess of Kiev, therefore, of what today is Ukraine, and also a prince of Norway, which is Russia nowadays. Putin, back in 2016, opened in a very long way this monument which has changed the profile of the Kremlin in order to provide the following symbolism. Russians, Belarusians, and Ukrainians are the same people. They have common roots because St. Vladimir, for example, is the one who converted and changed all these lands into the Orthodox Church. And this idea, which was expressed at the opening of this monument, Putin represented it as much as he can. Once a year, there is a TV program, and it says Linian's president, which is directly with the president, and the viewers can ask him questions. In the last edition in June, a viewer asked Putin why was he not including in the list of enemy countries, Ukraine, and the answer of Putin said, because the Ukrainian people and the Russian people are the same, and this was the argument that he gave. And sometime later, July, something happened in a very extraordinary way. Putin signed himself a very long lengthy article when he wanted to state his position about this, and the title was the United History or the same shared history between the Ukrainian people and the Russian people. And there he defends how for a thousand years, this was the same people with the same trade, cultural, linguistic links, and this has been broken, or something wants to break this. And how is it possible to break this? Putin criticizes the role played by Lenin in the creation of the USSR when he defends that each republic will have the right to separate, to become independent. This is criticized by Putin, and also to incorporate this law in the reform of the Constitution. So Lenin, what he's defending is that each republic of the ones that will make up the USSR is equal to the other, they have the same rights. And then during the constitutional reform, constitutional proposal, this is what he says that they can become independent. So Putin says in the text that this is a time bomb in these people who were united. So this is the framework in 2014 for Western country. This is a revolt of the Ukrainian people asking for more freedom and asking to lend a hand towards Europe and less towards Russia. And according to Putin, this is a coup d'etat, a coup d'etat in order to change a president who is pro-Russian, in order to replace him by someone who is pro-Ukrainian. And this is a wound which remains and he stays in Crimea and not telling exactly the truth about his plans. And then he accepts the plans saying that he was sending some soldiers here to keep Crimea. And then the conflict of the Donbas also started. These are the two territories with pro-Russian majority which revolt with weapons against this situation. These are the weapons that Russia does not admit to distribute or support. And he says that these people do not accept this new situation that wants to be imposed according to Putin in Ukraine back in 2014. What is the language used by Putin when he speaks about what's happening at Donbas? He talks about genocide. Terminology used by Putin when he talks to the Russian, he says that the Donbas where there is a majority of pro-Russian population that don't want to accept the situation of 2014. Now officially the government of Ukraine with the support of the Western country, there is a power chasing them that want to destroy them, take their voice away from them to speak Russian or listen to Russian songs in the radio. So this is the discourse which has been imposed from here. So what the Western countries see as an attack from Russia towards Ukraine, here they explained that they tried to defend the Russians, Russians who live in Ukraine or pro-Russian people who live in Ukraine who had this common past and who are under attack by this new government defended by the Western countries. So this is the explanation in order to understand not what I think but the official position of Russia. And this is the interpretation not often seen by the Western countries. So this is the starting point of Vladimir Putin. Thank you very much. Manel, very interesting, this new context and this clash of perspectives that has to be established between Russia and the Western countries. And I would like to greet Oksana, good morning Oksana. I would like to give you the floor also. So you can make a first intervention. I would like to present Oksana Chelyseva, journalist, human rights defendant. She lives in Finland now. She won back in 2014 the Oksana with Ben Price freedom of expression. Oksana, you have the floor. You can make your intervention and maybe set the framework for the debate. Hello. Well, thank you everybody for organizing this very important discussion. Well, actually, for me, it's quite a challenge to speak about these issues because being a Russian. So I can be easily labeled as some pro. Which is unfortunately the usual narrative at the moment to just to dismiss facts which are not convenient, which are difficult. So, but I want, I am not going to start with going to the ancient history of the key of Russia. And I will never concentrate my representation, yes, of the situation around the personality of Vladimir Putin. I think that the Western media and the Western countries make a very huge mistake by looking into the situation in Ukraine through the prism of Vladimir Putin. No matter what happens, how it happens, what's the background of the developments, the only person who the Western media's talks is Vladimir Putin. And it makes him extremely powerful because you are making him powerful. You are creating the image of the omnipotent dictator who is capable of everything. Meanwhile, meanwhile, just before you started this debate and I hope that it would be a bit different environment for me. I have to share that I have been involved into a very intense communication with the UN Human Rights Monitoring Mission. Because since early morning I personally started to get incoming reports about rapid deterioration of the situation along the entire contact line. And it means that civilians on both sides of the contact line are in danger. And in my communication to the UN Human Rights Monitoring Mission, based on the reports coming from people based on both government and non-government control parts, yes, of the area. So it's clear that today this was the Ukrainian armed forces which started firing indiscriminately along the entire contact line. This is a very difficult fact. They are not very popular. There have been already houses damaged, kindergartens damaged on both sides of the contact line and I'm not in the mood to speak about ancient history or Vladimir Putin. Thank you very much, Oxana, for what you say the situation is much more complex than what we hear through the media. In this sense, at the end of your intervention, I would like to know what is Manel's opinion. You were talking about international actors. And we were talking about this before we start in our conference. And a little bit. Could you explain how from an international perspective, what is the role that today I was reading for example that the European presidents were having an emergency meeting in order to see how to organize themselves. But Europe is not having a very clear stance. I don't know if you would like to answer about this. Well, first of all, I would like to say that I completely agree with Oxana. We are creating a huge character out of Putin, and we fell into the traps that are convenient for the Russian president, not only the media, but also politicians, etc. So we are creating character much more powerful than the power that he would really have. And he likes that. It's convenient to him. So, today, we are receiving many images, worrying, as Oxana was saying, from this contact claim, which in theory, now there should be a ceasefire, because some agreements were signed back in 2015, the means to agreements they were designed in 2014. And it is true that little by little, because eight years have gone by. So we are speaking as if a new war should start. And this is a mistake. This is a war which is already happening. And sometimes it's fluctuating. And now it is true that today we are receiving very worrying informations and videos, for example, the one of the kindergarten, which is circulating. And what is serious is that we go back to the situation 2014 is same video with the same attack. Same kindergarten. And now, in my mobile, I have two versions. One, which is a kindergarten in a place. It's complicated to verify things to check from here. And some are saying this is the zone under Ukraine control. And the other ones are saying this is the zone under Russian control. This is important because then the attack comes from the other, but it's important to verify this. And I can tell you that both will say that it's a provocation made by the other in a way that as Oxana was saying, some people are already suffering. And we are at a very delicate moment. And it is true. And I believe that now the negotiation is situated this place in a debate which is very complicated how to stop it, how to make it to come to a stance. And some parts say that the key is in the Minsk agreements. They are already written clear points, but both parties accuse each other of not fulfilling them. And in the middle we have this escalate and Russia is placing their troops in a very overwhelming way and ostentatious way. And the image that we have now is that the NATO is responding by sending weapons. So we have a very complex situation. A few minutes ago Sergey Lavrov, the Minister of Foreign Affairs said that he sent his written answer to the US, and he hopes that the NATO will evaluate it. And let's see if they can keep talking about the steps, political steps. I don't know if it's leading them to a de-escalate in a few hours. It's just a very boring situation today. I don't know if Oxana, if you would like to react to these comments. Definitely, definitely. Actually, it's also important to remember that today Russia has called her to hold the UN Security Council. And for some specific reason, there is a direct correlation between different important events and the deterioration of the situation. This is not the first time when we observe such, some people would call it such a coincidence, which is also extremely boring. Another boring fact, as I tell you, I fully agree with Manel that their only hope now is to establish the truth, to establish the facts and verify, verify the incoming information. And in this respect, the role of international observations missions is extremely important, fortunately. So in this world today, I tell you that the UN Human Rights Monitoring Mission is extremely responsive. So they are collecting all bits of information. And I hope that the truth will be established with regard to this kindergarten, which was hit fortunately without children inside, although this is a functioning kindergarten. So I also agree with Manel that both sides keep telling that this is the village under diesel debt control. Meanwhile, the situation is also complicated, but media unfortunately doesn't like this complicated elements, because this village of Kondrashovka, how it is called, it is located some seven kilometers away from Stanice Lugansk, which is the government control part, but this village, this particular settlement was supposed to be in the so called demilitarized zone, in the gray zone of the conflict, but the Ukraine down forces to control over the village in August last year, with raids being held. So there's the level of control of either side. Well, yes, this is under, it's still, it is still under control of the armed forces of Ukraine. So we also obtained a video footage taken by one of the local civilian residents of this particular village at the time of the shelling, which was also sent to the attention of their international observation missions. So I really hope that the truth will come out, certainly if it is needed. Thank you very much. I would like to take advantage of this moment to remind people who are listening to us that they can ask any questions and we will try to include these questions in the chat. It's very interesting to talk about this information and misunderstanding and misinformation because this can dominate the narration, the one who dominates the narration, the situation and the context is much more important than maybe the suffering of the families and the citizens of the area. And it is kind of dangerous because we're living very fast. This has happened to anybody who is following this video is circulating in the media, and they both both parties claim the video. Yes, and I would like to take advantage of your journalistic perspective, Manel in Moscow was already saying that the information's coming out from there are completely opposed to what we could see if we were watching US news watch. So what can you tell us about this? How is the propaganda? Well, it's not propaganda but how information is used in order to position the citizens or maybe to flatten the path for military harsh interventions which could not be easy at all. I hope I have made myself clear. Yes, I think that, first of all, the journalist, we are responsible, we have a responsibility, because one thing is to repeat what both parties are saying, and we could do that. But another thing is our duty. Our duty is to check what both parties are saying, if it's true, and if it has a base and Oksana has said something important we need time to check the facts. And unfortunately, the media want to have clear and quick headlines. If somebody calls me now, and they ask me what has happened in this kindergarten, and I want to do it straight away. I have to say I don't know. I don't know because I cannot check it. But once I have checked it, I will explain it to you. What happens if I can only check it in a week? Well, I will have to give you the news in a week, but the news are half past two. And what happens is that I think that the situation is reaching a surrealistic point, because now we have Russia saying that they're withdrawing the troops and showing you videos. This is distributed by the Minister, Russian Minister of Defense. In fact, I was at the same spot when they have been deployed, but I couldn't get close. So I couldn't see it. I don't know if it's true or not. I know nothing. But all these images, the Ministry of Defense, Russian Ministry of Defense is sending you, they say they're being withdrawn. But what we see is that the Kremlin has lost credibility. People in general don't believe what the Kremlin is saying. But on the other hand, you have the NATO or Joe Biden who says that on the same date that Russia is saying they're withdrawing the respond with a very harsh message, much harsher than the one we have seen. The same date that Russia is withdrawing, shows the German Chancellor and his reaction was different. So the summary by show was, if it's true, we will have to verify it. And if it's true, we applaud the decision. So this is the path. And from the U.S., we see much harder positions. So as a journalist, I find it difficult. It's not so difficult to check if there is a de-escalation or not. But these are things that escaped to me and should be easier to check. So, honestly, as a journalist, I think that I can say, I know up to here, but from here at any time, or I don't know, because otherwise we're contributing to escalation and misinformation. Thank you, Manel. Oksana. I fully agree with Manel on that. I would like to share some personal experiences which I have obtained during the course of my work on these matters. And I need to emphasize that I was born in Ukraine. Half of my family lives there. This is not just a country. This is part of me. This is part of my motherland. So this is the motherland of my mother. So sorry. I can't, just as some politicians won't cut me, cut myself into two parts and say, okay, I'm Russian. No, yeah, I'm Russian. Where is my mother being half Ukrainian Roma, half Ukrainian Greek, with my great-grandfather speaking Ukrainian to us, his grandchildren. And this is my other mother, a grandmother in Russian who was, who was interned to the Nazi camp located in Ukraine and saved by a Romanian soldier and a German officer and then hosted by Ukrainian families. I really want to emphasize that it's, it's not, well, it's not just land and it's not just war. This is a huge personal drama for all people who live in Russia and in Ukraine. And in this respect, I am only on the side of the civilians who suffer. And I do blame a lot on the irresponsibility of journalists, and I'm now a member of the Union of Journalists of Finland. I don't accept the way how the Ukrainian conflict, the Ukrainian tragedy is being covered by the Western media. Yes, sometimes it's better to wait, to not to go after a loud title and definitely not to connect everything to one particular side or to one particular political leader, either Putin or Biden. But yes, but for journalists it's very difficult to wait. But it's very important if we don't want to fuel the fire and to bear some ultimate responsibility for our irresponsibility. So in my experience, I prefer to wait, and when I get information, this is my kind of rule of behavior. I send it to the attention of the international observation missions and wait until they check and verify these incoming reports. Besides that, there are also other very credible instances and official bodies, which actually can be the source of verified information like the European Court of Human Rights. And I would like to give an example which actually I thought to give. This is the case of the second trade union fire in Odessa. I checked the Western media, so the European media before our discussion. There is no single article about the fact that in January this year, the European Court of Human Rights launched communication with regard to their multiple fatalities and casualties in the trade union fire and also the shooting in Grachiskaya Square in Odessa, which had preceded the events in the trade union. And my question is why? Isn't it important? Isn't it interesting? Should it be brewed to the attention of the public? By the way, there are cases such, so there are 31 victims, either those who lost their relatives or who survived or who suffered in the course of those tragic events of May the 2nd. 31 applicants to the European Court of Human Rights and the Strasbourg has started communication with Ukraine in this case, which is launched against Ukraine. So my question remains, why this fact is being silenced? There is an official press release of Strasbourg on the matter with the set of questions which the sites of the case have to respond to, first and foremost, Ukraine. I'm afraid that this question is going to be very difficult to answer. Yes, I totally agree with this last reflection made by Roxana. I understand this is the result of the way we consume the news. Some of us only see the tip of the iceberg, but underneath this whole narration, which will help us to understand, and often, unless we go to a specialized forum or specialized publication, it's difficult to go in depth about the information about the why and how. Unless you go and reach it, there is access, but we are talking about a very specific communication web page, a specific writer podcast, and luckily there is a proliferation of these autonomous ways of providing information, but we also have to question them, because in the end there is always an interest behind the information. Unfortunately, it shouldn't be like this, but often the European Court of Human Rights plays a very important role, but the news do not come from there, you have to look for them. You won't find them on newspaper cover, because these are things difficult to understand for the citizenship, and we, of course, will learn a lot from it. I don't go every day into the reading these resolutions, but this is where the European and Western politics are made. I don't know if Manel would like to say anything. Yes, what Oksana was saying, I think that this will be a question for my colleague, because what Oksana is explaining, and this is the way I understand it, is that sometimes it's difficult to break narrations, and in this conflict when people are suffering, both parties are suffering, and sometimes we have the feeling that we are only placing more importance to what fits the narration of a specific media. So if this fire, when so many people die, let's imagine that instead of Odessa it was in Donetsk, and instead of pro-Russian people die, the Ukrainians die if we have reported in a different way. And this is another element for discussion, right? Oksana? Well, absolutely so, and I would even protest to using the term pro-Russian. So what is pro-Russian? There is a person who speaks Ukrainian, but who doesn't recognize the authority of this government or the war as such. Why are they pro-Russian or maybe they are pro-Ukrainian? Because they want peace for Ukraine. They don't want a deeper split between different stratus of the society. Have you been interested to cover stories of those Ukrainian army servicemen who quit the war? Do you know that they exist? Do you know that there are people on the Ukrainian side of the conflict who quit the war and who denounce the war right now? I myself have tried to bring some of such people to attention of, let's say, Washington Post. And I personally have been in correspondence with the Washington Post, whether they might be interested to interview this kind of people. It has been extensive communication. We brought nothing because the story is too complicated and it's not just one particular person. There are quite a number of people like that. One of them, for instance, is now based in Finland, where he got political protection from Ukraine. He quit the war. He started to make steps, public steps, open steps to speak the truth about that war and to bridge so-called confronting sides. He went into civil journalism. He started to run his video blog. He was threatened by the far right, very badly threatened. He came to Finland not to ask for asylum, but just before he wanted to spend his honeymoon with his newlywed wife in Finland, whereas the news reached him that the security services, the SBU of Ukraine launched a criminal case against him. He had to stay in Finland. He had to ask for protection in Finland and Finland granted protection to this ex-Ukrainian army person. So isn't it a story? This is a big story. I have also been in communication with a number of people who are still in Ukraine who have denounced, by the way, one of those ex-Ukrainian army servicemen. Just half an hour before our meeting had sent me his analysis of that very attack on kindergarten, which he agreed to share with the UN Human Rights Monitoring Mission. Will Catalan media will be interested to communicate to such a person? And unlike Western media, so the UN Human Rights Monitoring Mission is very much interested to get this kind of analysis. And if they want, I will personally establish direct link between the UN Human Rights Monitoring Mission and this particular ex-Ukrainian military who analyzed the strike. I am interested. Yeah, I will share. Yes, I will establish context between you and him. Thank you. This is one of the reasons why I think this type of conference is so interesting to establish contact with these people. This is useful to provide more perspectives and more voices. It's very interesting. In the end, we are talking about conflict between countries, block of countries, and we don't analyze the civil society. Maybe the conflict of Russia and Ukraine between societies could be solved easier than what we think because we're talking about powers, global positions, geopolitical positions. And this is where realities get complicated and usually are stagnated in societies and maybe individually they don't want to have problems. The case of Europe, for me, is flagrant when someone or a conflict is close to Russia. We always talk about gas and the price of gas and this is the argument we use to close our eyes and say there's nothing we can do. It goes beyond how people are afraid of certain things and they should be afraid of other things. The most important thing is that often the image that we give from the media is very cold positions, contact lines, lines, economic consequences. I remember that back in 2015, when I was there, I tried to cover the line dominated by the Ukrainian army and then I went into the line that was not controlled under the Ukrainian army. And I saw both parts and I saw criminal abuses both sides and what was staggering for me from a human point of view is that you are sent there to try to understand and to explain what's going on so people can understand. And I was the first one who couldn't understand how we reached that point because when you see people losing their houses, the barbarian situation there at a place like the city of Donetsk, which was a city which looked very European. Big people had watched the games of the team of this city when you take a look at the neighborhood, it was very difficult to understand the situation. And this is my personal problem. I face when I travel to these places because from outside you see different positions if we were playing risk and it's just the opposite. It's a completely different thing. I don't know if Oxana would like to add anything. I think you have developed it very well Manel, but it's important to understand the social and human component of the complete people are suffering. And this is not chess game or a risk game board game. There are many lives at the stake and many futures at the stake. And sometimes we seem to forget about this. Well, to stop the war and to really help the political, the search for the political resolution, which is the Minsk Agreement, but now is there. The problem is whether to motivate the sites to implement Minsk Agreements. I fully agree with all politicians on these important factors. There is no other way, but to start really implement the Minsk Agreement. First and foremost, to keep the ceasefires. Actually, you can't start communication on peace with sharing going on. And with a huge level of disinformation, yes, so that's my point remains and unfortunately I have to repeat it. We have to rely on information coming from the International Observations missions. We have, if we really want to get prompt information and not to wait for weeks, yes, to demand that the OECSMM follows the situation in a more rapid way. Unfortunately, now it takes quite a lot of time for them, especially to react to the reports on civilian fatalities, casualties and the damage to the civilian infrastructure. Well, one of the last cases, which I personally was involved into because I reported these reports, which I got on 29th of January. There was a civilian man wounded in the village of Aleksandrovka, which is the non-government control part of the Minsk region, which is very close to the frontline or conticline. So, although I didn't receive their message confirming that they received the report on that, I send them all information, the name of the victims, the circumstances, because his neighbors contacted me personally. And also the contact numbers of people to make it easier for the international observers to verify the information. I also send them the contact number of people who actually could verify the information. So, actually it was confirmed, and now this is part of the official report of the OECSMM. The man was really wounded by a sniper from the Ukrainian side. And it was, well, unfortunately today there is another civilian victim reported now in these difficult circumstances on the government controlled part. And this is a woman born in 1957, if I'm not mistaken. So, she was standing on the bus stop near the school in the town of Marien, which is the government control part of the Minsk region. She was a woman who was wounded and taken to hospital in Purakhava. So, I'm giving these two examples of absolutely innocent civilian people, because that man wounded by a sniper, he was a cop at a local school in Aleksandrovka. So, to let you know that we have to deal not with a metaphoric game between two big sides, like USA and Russia, where is Ukraine being smashed between the interests of the two. I'm not a fan of quite many things which the Ukrainian government actually has done, but I'm sorry for President Zelensky. In the last two weeks, actually all of their calls to the Western media, first and foremost, to come down and not to cost panic in their country, so they were ignored. Actually, their calls, their requests, their demands, they didn't matter in this big game, but this big game actually destroys people's lives. And when I read their open statements, by for instance, Arhamiya, so who is their head of their servants of the people, governmental fraction in the Supreme Rada of Ukraine, parliament of Ukraine. So, when I read like recently, so it was like yesterday, so he made a public statement that actually Ukraine, due to this disinformation campaign launched by Bloomberg, New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, so has caused a lot of damage to their already crushing economy. So, if we want to really help the situation, we should respect Ukraine, first and foremost, and to listen to them and to listen to people, you know, because I'm really shocked. So, in the recent days, in the recent weeks, a huge number of foreign journalists actually flooded Ukraine. And there was, for instance, one artist in Mariupol, who was some two weeks ago complained in your Facebook, well, we have a lot of foreign journalists in Mariupol, and they are asking to show them signs of panic, but we don't have panic. So, is the task of journalism now to create circumstances which would lead to some more open full scale conflict? I think that the behavior shows that yes. If there is no panic, let's do something to show that there is some panic because actually, otherwise, the story will be too complicated for our audiences. How come? We claim that Russia is going to attack and inside Ukraine there is no panic. It's not possible. And there is a way out of that. So, just let's go back to pure journalism. Yes, it's very difficult to search for information on the web page of the European Code and Human Rights, but this is our job. It's our job to search for this information to read these complicated texts and to report their moves. It's not their task to send their press releases to the major media outlets. It's all on the web page. And if we are journalists, okay, why don't we start to speak about different people to make a complete picture? Because no politician can make a justified decision, a grounded decision, not being provided with facts. And if we deal with Ukraine, it's necessary to talk to Ukrainians and to respect their opinions. It's very easy. But even now I hear all the time Putin, Putin, Putin. This is kind of mantra. Yes, Putin exists. Yes, Putin is not a Democrat. I can give you a lot of examples of huge violations of human rights in Russia. But is it the reason to justify some gross human rights violations in Ukraine and to ignore the obvious facts which Ukrainians are screaming about? Again, I'm here in Finland. And for instance, there is a, now I can speak about that openly. Now there are, you know, well, there's a Finnish stories dealing with another case from Ukraine. Another person is in Finland asking for asylum in Finland. And this is a Ukrainian journalist, Vasily Muravitsky, who fled Ukraine. And by the way, it's also very interesting. So Vasily Muravitsky has been recognized as a prisoner of conscience by everything international. He was mentioned in various reports also by the State Department of the USA. But he is quite a complicated person to bring to light via Western media, and he is our colleague. And actually he was imprisoned for more than a year. He was under house arrest for nothing for more than a year. He was threatened by neo-nazis, openly threatened by neo-nazis. And now he is seeking protection in Finland, being supported by Amnesty International and is of no concern. And we still, and I still keep reading articles about Mr Putin. Why don't you write about Vladimir Muravitsky? Why don't you write about people in Ukraine who have their opinion? Even though it might be quite difficult or different from the mainstream, or I don't say, I don't even, it's difficult to say whether it is mainstream opinion in Ukraine, because there is a quite diverse sphere, yes, in Ukraine. By the way, have you ever seen that in the Western media, in our media, that for instance, some days ago, the Greek Ministry for Foreign Affairs, and I remind Greece is the EU country, yes? The Greek Ministry for Foreign Affairs officially on their webpage published the statement of condolences to the victims in one village in the Netsk region in the government control part. The village is called Granitne, and there was a scuffle between local civilians and three soldiers of the National Guard of Ukraine about a trivial matter. But two people were killed by the Ukrainian soldiers for nothing. Yes, because this is the official statement, it was about the trivial matter. Several more were wounded. Have you read it in your media that the Greek Ministry for Foreign Affairs expressed condolences over the deaths and wounds of people of Greek descent in the Netsk region? No, it's too complicated. I don't know if you want to add anything. We have mentioned it several times. Maybe you can tell us something about the Minsk agreements, and maybe you can make a brief summary. Brief summary, and for sure Oxana can concrete it. In 2014, when the conflict was open, these agreements were not respected. In 2015, February, we signed Minsk too, so they have a series of steps in order to stop that war, stop shooting and bringing heavy weapons, exchange of prisoners, etc. And maybe the key aspects, once the area is pacified, is what's the future status of Donbass, political status, whether to recognize it in a special way, and maybe also, and this is where parties don't agree, how to dialogue. Because Ukraine can maybe establish a dialogue with the different representatives of the self-proclaimed Donetsk and Lugansk republics, but they don't want to do it. But basically, this is the summary, some steps to pacify first the war and then to reach a political situation that maybe will provide a special status to both regions within Ukraine. I don't know if Oxana would like to add anything, apologies because I interrupted you, but I think it was important to highlight this. Yes, absolutely, and I can't but agree. I have to repeat once again, so Minsk agreement is the path to some solution, to some practical solution. With the Minsk agreements, the feeling we have is that everybody say this is the solution, and apparently it's the solution, we talked about the Normandy format, the signature is the Ukrainian president, Russian president, but also France and Germany as observers. And what we understand from here in Russia is that they were signed at the moment where the Ukrainian army was losing the war, and they are signed at the specific moment and maybe now Ukraine will not agree on these agreements, Minsk agreements. This is the feeling we have. So if they're applied, the Ukrainian president will have another opinion, etc. Now what Russia is saying is either we move forward in the Minsk agreements because we've been waiting for seven years since their signature, or now the Duma, the Russian parliament has already approved to call on the president to recognize these regions as independent. So if Vladimir Putin once at any moment, or the Duma could recognize as independent, these two regions. If this happened, and Russia say this is not the first option, but the second, if this happened, the Minsk agreements will be definitely agreed, because we will not follow the points in order to reach this special status, but the independence will be recognized. So, more or less, this is the summary. Thank you. I think it was important. I will say the agreements are like a scenario which won't happen, taking into account the current events, apparently they have not been respected, recognition of independence of the regions. And this is a starting point for warfare escalation. If this happened, I don't know if Xana has any information about the positioning about the Minsk agreements, the different positionings. Well, actually I have to clarify a bit, because in my view, Ukraine, although they signed the agreements, yes, but actually since the very beginning, not just now, but since the very beginning, they were quite loud horses inside Ukraine, which protested the political part, yes, of the agreements. I also have to remind that President Zelensky, not long ago, just also a few days ago, actually promised that they would start discussing the political part, but actually it's also part of the Minsk agreement that they have a law, yes, describing, so defining the status of the region, I mean of Donbass. So, it's a very complex measure, definitely. And again, so I can't agree that Ukraine stopped to agree with the Minsk agreement right now. No, they never agreed. And the loudest part of the voices against Minsk agreement are their far right, are their nationalists. And unfortunately, this is the reality. So President Zelensky is very much afraid of this very loud minority, yes, of the Ukrainian society. But the role of the Ukrainian far right, the role of the Azov movement. I speak about not just the regiment Azov, but I speak about the Azov movement, and all other less significant groups with far right and even neo-Nazis views. So this is another very complicated matter, which is not on the webpages. And it is, well, this is so complicated, this is so sensitive that let's not bother our audiences with these difficult problems. And unfortunately, especially in the last several months, like, well, I would say that in my view, so the escalation started to develop since, let's say, mid-November last year. And also their internalization of the Ukrainian far right, their links of Azov movement with various groups in many countries in Europe. So it has gone away, yes, from the public discussions. Although, yes, there was a period of time when it again reached the mainstream media, and I have to remind about a huge dispute between US and Ukraine about one US citizen who volunteered for the Ukrainian right sector paramilitary unit, and who now FBI wants for the murders he committed in the USA as well. And there was also information coming from the US about war crimes committed by this particular person and some people like him in the context of the conflict in Ukraine. So, but that's too complicated. Once again, we have to deal with quite many complicated things. Yes, this is the reality that we face. It's very complex. Many actors involved, some of them will appear because China has not positioned itself, but we know it's latent. We have a few minutes before the end. And I wonder if you would like to say, give us some final comments. So I will give you the floor first to Manel and then to Oxana. If you want to make a final comment about how you see what we have mentioned so far, or maybe what are the perspectives that you see for the next week, we can help. I don't want you to be a futurologist because it's impossible but you understand what I mean. Yes, I just wanted to say that it is true that the media lack many attributes, that's for sure. And this time, we speak a lot about the media, western media, but if we see the information done in Russia about this conflict, doesn't go through any filter either. It's spectacular to see from here how the media tried to bring fire to the situation in Russia much worse than what we could ever imagine. So, what can we expect from now on? We don't know. My intuition is, but it's just an intuition. I wouldn't make news about this. My intuition is that the media have been getting ready for something to happen and now they are waiting for something that maybe will not happen. And this can be a long-term race, because this conflict is not a conflict, a recent conflict, but it dates from 2014. So the media, one of the things that we do is appear and disappear. And maybe we shouldn't have not disappeared from this conflict that we are talking about. The possibility is that if nothing happens, all the way the media have introduced the conflict. And in this case, I'm referring to the western media. If Ukraine, in the end, or Russia does not invade the whole of Ukraine, which seems three months ago we were told this, we would think it's impossible. And now if we analyze the situation, it seems impossible that Russia wants to take on Ukraine completely. But the way we are reporting could seem that if things happen, I put in bracket stombas. Well, it will seem that not so many things are happening because it's not the whole invasion of Ukraine. And the situation is asking for patience to follow the situation closely, to trust the facts, to try to make some quality journalism and to take a look at the movements. So far, so far, it seems that Russia, at a minimum, would like to have movements in both parts because we're talking about donbas a lot. And we seem to talk about Ukraine, but it's something wider, which is the architecture of security in Europe. So Russia is asking the NATO to withdraw a little bit far from the border. But we see the opposite, images of more weapons to protect, in theory, Ukraine. So this is a first position, and we're maybe doing the opposite, but it must be dangerous. Maybe we're asking Ukraine, well, this is the condition that Russia is asking a maximum to say that Ukraine will not enter into the NATO, but many people think that if Ukraine, we throw this petition, the situation will de-escalate because one of the requisites asked by Russia will be fulfilled. So this is on the one hand NATO, and on the other, to take a look at the movements in donbas. Russia insisted in the Minsk agreements to be applied, and we will have to see how the other answer and whether there are provocations from one side or the other. And I'm afraid that nowadays, today at least, we are going through this scenario. And let's hope that this will not escalate. Thank you, Manel. Any final comments, Oxana? Well, it was 3 a.m. on February 13th, when quite many media outlets, starting from again from Bloomberg to quite many others, announced the time of the attack on Russia, also by the air strike at Kiev. And I was even shocked to see that some media took it so seriously that they launched their live streaming from the Maidan Square. I don't know why, because maybe they really thought that there would be the air missile strike at Kiev from Russia. This is outrageous. So this is not journalism. This is fueling the war. This is encouraging the war. My final comment would be to request journalists, civil society activists, bloggers, whoever else, and definitely politicians, not to apply double standards while we deal with such matters, if we genuinely want peace, stability, and security everywhere in the world. So that we don't deal with thousands of people on the move from Iraq or Afghanistan or elsewhere. So that we don't face the reality of making walls, like securing ourselves of people coming from the areas destroyed by wars, which actually, I'm sorry to say, not to brood there. So should we, should we kind of bait in mind while discussing that it's not just once again. So let's stop talking about Vladimir Putin all the time. Don't make him omnipotent God who rules your lives. He is not. And we have a lot of questions to him, but the way how he is being portrayed now. And the obvious attempt to close eyes on the role of Biden and either pre electoral problems, the problems which we have discussed in Ukraine at the moment, it doesn't make us any good. And finally, and very importantly, so while speaking about Ukraine, try to learn to respect Ukrainians. That's very important. You know, because Ukraine is different. There are Hungarians, Ukrainian Hungarians, there are Ukrainian Roma, they are Ukrainian Jewish, they are Ukrainian Bulgarians, they are Ukrainian Greeks. They are Ukrainian Poles. They are Ukrainian Russians and there are Ukrainians who speak Russian is their first language, try to learn to respect them. If you judge their lives. These are my final words here now. Roxana. Any comment from you? No, just to say to maybe give way to the floor, but I think that we are exaggerating the role played by Putin, but we're being ambivalent. So maybe we can de-escalate for sure and to unveil the US. The US has been unveiled on Wednesday already. When the world didn't start, it was crazy to announce this at three o'clock in the morning. But it's true that they are playing on purpose to be ambivalent. The withdrawal of troops, I think that will go as you say, on the 20th of February in Belarus, they will withdraw and leave. But Russia was also calculating what would happen if they deploy the troops the way they have done it. So this deployment of troops is not innocent. And they wanted to attack Ukraine because now, if I have to give you my personal opinion, I think there is no plan to invade Ukraine. This wouldn't make sense from the point of view of for Putin wouldn't be positive. So I don't think this plan exists, but it's true that from the moment they deploy, the way they do it is in order to create some movement. Well, thank you very much. One reflection we see via chat from Catalonia and Spain has always been very opposite to war when some bellic action has been presented some important sectors of society have manifested themselves or have made some public manifestations. And as far as this conflict, silent, certain silence. I don't know if you have any perception of why, because what we said before is like a chess game far away. And I don't understand what's the reason why because this is what you are saying. If we're playing to an escalation, if it's not a huge conflict, someone will be disappointed, but from a social perspective, at least let me speak about Spain because I don't know the parts of Europe. We have not seen this spontaneous response of lobbies, artists, society in general. I don't know if you know why. Personally, I don't know. I don't know why. But I don't know if it should happen now, because once again, we will be under the same situation. The war is about to start, we think, but Russia is saying that they don't want to invade Ukraine. So it could be that it could be also that unfortunately, if there are no images of things, people don't mobilize. And this is what we have so far like a discussion, the escalation or escalation and we don't know what's going on. But the truth is that I believe and I want to believe that most of the Spanish citizens do not want a war to take place. A war between Ukrainian and Russian or Ukrainian and Ukrainian doesn't matter. I'm convinced that people in Spain don't want to see any war. You know, I would like to add, you know, the first time when I came to Donbass in October 2014, and for me it was a huge tragedy. I didn't want to, I would never, it was impossible for me to imagine that I would ever come to the land which I love because of the war there. But at the same time it was a very powerful motive for me to go there because if I hadn't gone there to see with my own eyes what was going on, I wouldn't dare to express my views on that. So I went there to make my views. And the first trip was very long, for more than a month, and I went from Donetsk to Lugansk, and from Avdeevka to Mariupol, so again both sides. And when I was speaking to people in Donetsk, in Slavyansk, in Lugansk, and it was October 2014. You know, it was horrible for me to hear people in Lugansk and Donetsk saying that we couldn't imagine that our army would attack us. We didn't want it. So yes, we have our monuments, we have our history which is different from the history of Lviv. Let them have their history, let them have their heroes, and let us have our history and let us have our heroes, and this is all Ukraine. And when I came in Lugansk region to the town of Krasnodon, famous for the Smoledaik Vardya, the young guard, young victims, yes, of the Second World War. And there I was brought to the school and to the museum in this school. And the museum of this school was amazingly nice. With a lot of things about Ukrainian culture, about Ukrainian embroidery because it was also local embroidery of Lugansk region. They were books in Ukrainian in the school library, actually most of them were in the Ukrainian language. They didn't mind, and they wanted, they regarded themselves, Ukrainians, first and foremost, but they speak very often a different language. Also, in some particular villages, in Donetsk or Lugansk people speak Ukrainian or some dialect. And there are villages inhabited by ethnic Greeks in Donetsk region. And when I was in these villages, I met elderly people whose children translated me from Russian to the Greek because they speak Greek. Are you aware of that? And this is a long story, how these people, how these inhabitants of these Greek settlements in the Donetsk region actually feel towards their far nationalists of Ukraine, especially as a movement. So this is all Ukraine in its integrity, entirety and whatnot, and we should respect it if we want peace. Thank you very much. It's a nice final comment to understand that sometimes we talk of a country as a whole, and within the country there is several realities and several ways of understanding the land and the him. I'm very sorry that we have to call it a day. Thank you very much. My name is Anna Manel. I hope you found it interesting. It was very interesting for me and for everybody. Thank you very much. And I hope that in the future we can meet again and we can continue talking and bringing to the public through the foundation and through the Euro, things that we have mentioned before. There's not enough time to talk about this to go deep into it. So thank you very much to both of you for being here with us today. Thank you. Thank you. That's very important. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much to Sylvia and Gabrielle for translation. Thank you for your job. Fernanda for an album for producing the conference. So thank you very much and good luck. See you soon. Bye. Recording stopped. Okay, I think we're not live now. Very good. The technical part went well, I don't know. As I said, many positive comments too, apart from the chat and everything else. Thank you very much. I'm glad, thank you very much. Sylvia, we have completed the promise.