 Welcome, ladies and gentlemen. I'm Becky Anderson, the managing editor and bureau chief for CNN in the Gulf and Anchor of Connect the World with Becky Anderson. I'm delighted to be moderating this panel today. We'll do about 15-20 minutes and then I'll open the floor for questions that should give us about 10-15 minutes towards the end of this. Thank you both. Ukraine bracing for a third year of conflict just this morning, Russia initiated a total of 10 attacks on various targets across the country resulting in dozens of injuries. By most assessments, this war is at A and I quote here, stalemate, a sentiment echoed by the head of Ukraine's armed forces. On Tuesday, President Zelensky here passionately appealed to those gathered not to allow the conflict to become a quote, frozen one, cautioning that any frozen conflict could reignite, stealing even more years of peace from the nation. Yet with many capitals turning inwards in 2024 and what is the biggest electoral year in history and various geopolitical challenges, diverting the attention of policymakers, will Western unity on Ukraine endure and will the country receive the necessary military support to persevere and what are the prospects for peace, if any? I'm joined this afternoon by Lord David Cameron, the Secretary of State for Foreign Commonwealth and Development Affairs of the United Kingdom and Dmitry Kuleba, who is the Minister of Foreign Affairs in Ukraine. Thank you both very much indeed for joining us. Foreign Minister Kuleba, we heard a passionate plea from President Zelensky here and a very clear warning from the President about Putin's objectives. How worried are you about the prospects at present and about Western support for Ukraine fracturing? Well, we are at war and we just cannot allow ourselves to be worried. We have to remain focused. If we face a problem, we have to fix it. If we face a hesitation, we have to convince. I don't think it's fair to say that the support is being fractured. Actually, the most recent visit of Prime Minister Sunak to Ukraine and the agreements reached during the course of this visit demonstrate how committed and unwavering support is. Yes, there are still discussions in the United States Congress, but these are no discussions on Ukraine as such. This is the discussion on the border, on the southern border of the United States, and Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan are just part of the piece of legislation that is being discussed. So, you know, I keep saying, and I will repeat it once again, and we mean it when we say it, pessimists do not win wars. You have to be optimist. You have to find solutions instead of pouring ash on your head and saying that this is it. It's done. No, you have to move on and fix problems. If there are 10 problems, you have to fix all of them, but you have to move on. And we are pretty confident that we will be able to do it. With respect to those discussions on the Hill, holding up, are holding up the current aid package, and the following package is very unclear at this point. How concerned are you? And I'm talking about in the US, obviously. Well, in the world we live, I think the best strategy is to cross bridges when we come to them. So, we have now approached one bridge and trying to cross it, which is this package. When we approach the next one, then we will be working on that. And secondly, I do not know when we will reach that bridge. But 2024 seems to be certain, and we understand the timeline of developments. But I doubt any capital in the world has a clear vision for 2025. Foreign Secretary, Cameron, what's your sense of whether Ukraine will receive the military support it needs to turn the tide in its favour this year? I think it will. And I just take an incredibly clear view about this. Putin's invasion of Ukraine provides the challenge of our generation. This is the most naked example of one state illegally invading another. A full member of the United Nations, a country that should have its independence, its sovereignty, and its borders. And if you look at the allies that back Ukraine, and back Ukraine not just with money and diplomatic support, but also with weapons, our GDPs combined are 25 times the size of the Russian GDP. We just got to make our support count to help the Ukrainians in their brave struggle. And I'd also challenge a bit the current narrative. If you zoom out and look at the big picture here, this has been a catastrophic disaster for Putin. I mean, since the start of the war, he has lost half of the land that he took. He's had 300,000 casualties. He's been cut off and sanctioned by a good part of the free world, and those sanctions can only get tougher. And yes, of course, things have become quite stuck on land, but on sea, on the Black Sea, he's faced another catastrophe where over 20% of his navy has been sunk by a country, Ukraine, that only has a very small navy. And we talk about the support we need to give to Ukraine, and rightly we do, but also it's worth saying that with the Black Sea open, not thanks to the magnificence of Putin or the action of the UN, but the Black Sea open because of the action the Ukrainians have taken, they're exporting again, ships are sailing again, leaving their ports again, and so I take a different view, look at the big picture, and actually Ukraine has done well, is doing well, and our job is to support Ukraine through this winter, where again, I think Russia is failing in terms of their attacks, missile after missile has been shot down effectively to help Ukraine through this winter and to set up a system so that Ukraine can prevail in what will clearly be a longer war, where there's no doubt in mind, the West actually has the ability to support and to effect the right outcome. You've called for the seizure of some $350 billion of frozen Russian assets to fund the war effort. Can you legally justify that move? I know there's a big discussion about that at present, and is this an omission that the current sanctions regime on Russia has quite frankly failed to change Moscow's calculations? The way to think about it is we've already frozen those assets. The question is what should we do next, and I think there's a legal argument, a moral argument, and a political argument. The legal argument, the lawyers will give their advice about the right way this can be done, but there's growing legal support for the idea that there is a way of using these resources. I think the moral argument is quite straightforward, which is that at the end of the day Russia is going to have to pay reparations for its illegal invasions, so why not spend some of the money now rather than wait till the war is over and have all the legal wrangling about reparations? So I think the moral argument is strong. The political argument about what are the consequences does this change the way people see the way financial centres operate and all of those political arguments, on those I would say, look, when Putin launched this illegal invasion the world changed and we have to change with it and recognise we are in a more dangerous, uncertain and difficult world and so we should be prepared to do some innovative thinking about how we use these resources to help Ukraine. So I'm certainly working very hard on that. I think the rest of the G7 are. I think we're going to make some progress. As well as that, let's use all the sanctions regimes we have to hit the Russian individuals responsible with travel bans, asset freezes, all the other sanctions that you can do. One of the things Britain is doing is making sure we don't just announce the sanctions, but check that they're not being bypassed in other countries and I'm going to be encouraging every other European and Western leader that's here and foreign ministers that's here to make sure they're doing the same thing. Thank you. Foreign Minister Culeib, on the eve of this forum your government launched a new piece initiative bringing together 80 odd delegations. Certainly it was part of an initiative that has been ongoing. I think this is the fourth meeting that's been held. Notably a lot more from the global south were in attendance amongst those 80. China didn't participate. Of course Russia wasn't there. As talks with Russia have been declared illegal by President Zelensky, given these significant and worrying current narrative about whether or not there will be as much if any support for Ukraine, particularly out of the US, going forward. How long do you think you have to end this war and what are the prospects of peace at this point from Ukraine's perspective? Can you share more detail on what that peace proposal looks like? Less than a year ago, the first meeting of national security advisers on Ukraine's peace formula took place in Copenhagen, Denmark. It brought together 15 participants. The fourth meeting brought together 83. In the meantime, a lot of things happened in the world. We heard so many discussions about destruction, about fatigue, about the different kind of defeatist voices, but we see that the actual dynamics in engaging countries from all over the world into the Ukrainian plan is very positive. I think we are setting a precedent here where the terms of peace are being defined by a country whose peace was broken by an invader. It's not the invader who imposes his peace terms on the victim. It's not the third party that is proposing a compromise solution in a form of peace terms. It's us, the country that is fighting back, that defines the rules of peace. I think it's quite a remarkable moment in human history, in the history of wars and diplomacy. There are 10 points in this plan. One of them is accountability. Accountability implies the tribunal and paying for the damage inflicted. The most important part of this peace plan is restoring territorial integrity of Ukraine. When we hear arguments coming from experts or thinkers that maybe it's worse freezing the conflict, our response is we need frozen assets, not frozen conflict. This is the way forward. This is the way forward to send a clear message to everyone in the world that if you dare to break rules, you're going to pay. If we don't send that message, if we don't make it very clear, the number of conflicts, interstate conflicts and tensions across the globe will be growing. The price of fixing them will be much higher than the price of helping Ukraine. I think this is one of the motivations that brings all these countries at the table because they realize the consequences of not participating in an effort to restore peace on just terms. The next step will be summit and President Zelensky agreed with President of Switzerland to begin working on organizing the first summit here in Switzerland actually. There is a lot of diplomatic work that will be coordinating with the United Kingdom and I guess David and I will be working a lot on making it success because this success is important not just for peace in Ukraine but for global peace. That's right. You get peace through being strong. I think that it's always worth remaking the point that when Ukraine had its referendum in 1991 every single part of Ukraine including Crimea, including the Donbass, voted to be independent, to be one Ukraine. I think the job of Allies is to back Ukraine in this struggle and to allow them to work out the agenda for when they want to do more work on peace and settlements and all the rest of it. I sometimes say to other foreign ministers if you say let's support Ukraine and also let's promote a new peace process you won't get either of those things. If you support Ukraine you may well get the second thing but that's what we need to do now and as I say I think we should think about the next year as one in which Ukraine with this support can actually grow stronger, grow stronger economically, diplomatically, militarily. This should be the aim and that will make peace more likely. I think that is the way to think about it. As Dimitra says, this is not just about Ukraine's security. This is fundamentally about European security but also about American security too. History demonstrates to us that if you appease an aggressor in Europe the aggressor comes back for more and when the aggressor comes back for more the price you eventually pay in your own troops and in the cost of your own country the price gets higher and higher and I think that's the argument we need to make in the United States. Obviously they've got some big political arguments taking place there but fundamentally there is a majority in Congress for the support. We just need to find it and make sure it votes for it. Which brings me to my next question Foreign Minister Culebi. Your president concedes that one of the things that splits support for Ukraine in the US is elections and the fact that in Ukraine elections certainly presidential elections are unlikely. Does that worry you that voices on the hard right in the US are trying to tie further support to what they see as the need to show that this is a democratic process in action? Are you confident that you will still be around as well? Should there be a vote ultimately governmental and presidential? It's always remarkable to hear far right caring for democracy especially in a foreign country but I think the good news is that they seem to have run out of arguments if they resort to this one. The holding Ukraine is a democracy I'll tell you more. Ukraine would not have survived would not survive if it was not a democracy. It's our democratic nature and the way our country is organized that helped us to repel the aggression the Russian invasion and save the state. We are a democracy we will remain a democracy we have pre-district rules in the constitution on holding elections during the war time we have a wartime reality for example as foreign minister I am in charge of the vote abroad and depending on whose data you find credible from 5 to 10 million Ukrainians who found who became refugees abroad will have to vote it's technically at this point it's just technically impossible to organize a proper vote for them and let them express their will but the whole discussion must end at one simple point we will we are deeply committed to remaining a democratic country a part of the democratic world because what we fight for is actually democracy itself No elections this year Well I'm not the one who's making decisions I will if I have to go and vote I will if I have to organize the vote if I have to organize the vote under the circumstances I described I will organize them but I asked all countries with huge Ukrainian communities about the legal and technical framework for organizing elections and some responses came that some responses were that we can organize a vote only on the premises of our diplomatic mission how can you have hundreds of thousands of people make them vote in one premise I also have a feeling that the very same people who are complaining about this point if elections were held with all the difficulties of getting people to vote in parts of Ukraine that are occupied by Russian soldiers they'd be the first to complain that these elections aren't accurate, are not proper are not fair the only thing I'd say is someone who's led a country recently I saw his approval rating has slipped from 90% to 80% I used to dream of that 80% so I mean what you said one of the first things I did as Foreign Secretary was to go and visit Kiev and Odessa and one of the things that most strikes you is the incredible unity of purpose of the Ukrainian people I mean actually Putin not only has he united the Ukrainian people as perhaps never before he's also united NATO as never before he's worried about the expansion of NATO he has caused Sweden and Finland two countries Sweden by the way has just announced it's doubling its defence budget to highly capable countries joining NATO and making it stronger Ukraine clearly at the top of your box it was your first trip out of the gate as soon as you took this job recently I must ask was I think it would be remiss of me not to ask given that we're talking elections UK likely to go to the polls by the end of the year UK are passionately about Ukraine and as I say it's clearly at the top of your box do you have any confidence that you will be in place to drive that policy forward come this time next year well we have an election year and I am absolutely sort of committed part I didn't join this government simply to be Foreign Secretary I joined the government because I think we have a highly capable Prime Minister who leads a very strong team that's now got a growing economy that is making I think important steps in the world with a vital domestic reform programme and I think we have every opportunity so I don't I've been around in politics for a while I stood in 1997 when we lost an election very badly this does not feel like that at all it feels like we've got a very dynamic Prime Minister a dynamic team with a very clear agenda and crucially the right values to help our country in a world that is troubled and difficult and uncertain and dangerous and I think that core conservative value of security is the one that we need right now and let's talk about that world which is increasingly feeling frightening and dangerous your cabinet colleague Defense Secretary Grant Shaps this week said and I quote we find ourselves at the dawn of this new era we've come full circle moving from a post war to a pre war world and he name checks China, Russia, Iran, North Korea there do you agree with that assessment and I have to ask given what is going on in Gaza at present with that conflict and the evidence of spillover, significant spillover at this point are you concerned that that is a distraction in support for Ukraine you have called for a sustainable ceasefire but not an immediate ceasefire and where do you stand on that? Of course I mean it's absolutely right this is a very dangerous world illegal invasion, you've got the situation in the Middle East the more wars taking place in Africa at the moment that we've seen for perhaps 40 years but turning very directly to your question look we want this conflict to end as soon as possible we don't want it to go on for a moment longer than necessary and what I said very clearly yesterday first of all we need a immediate pause an immediate humanitarian pause so that we can get aid in and we can get hostages out that is absolutely essential and I think the really important question is is there some way of turning that pause into the sustainable ceasefire that we want to see because it would be much better if we didn't after a pause return to fighting return to violence return to destruction but in order for that to happen a number of things would have to happen we'd have to see Hamas' leadership leaving Gaza we'd have to see an end to the threat of rocket and terrorist attacks we'd have to see a Palestinian authority perhaps bolstered with Palestinian expertise from elsewhere perhaps including Gaza helping to provide the governance and the services that people need and of course as part of that you're going to need this longer term horizon for how you see a historic settlement of the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians but I think that should be the approach we try to take get the aid in, get the hostages out get that hostage negotiation done and see if we can turn that into the sustainable ceasefire we all need to see and the reason for using this word sustainable is if you think you can just stop fighting and do nothing else you'll never get a two state solution because you can't have a two state solution with Hamas in Gaza able to launch rockets and terror attacks and that's why it's so important that those conditions are put in place Briefly How big a distraction does it feel at present the conflict in the Middle East to sort of, you know, eye on the ball when it comes to support for Ukraine Well, we know better than anyone else that every war is a tragedy and I really find it inappropriate to consider wars taking place in the world through the perspective of destructions destructions, yes, destructions so that's just not the way we think about it when we meet when we meet with our partner governments we feel that they are focused here in Davos everyone is focused everyone wants both wars to end and peace to be restored the world has capacity to handle conflict a number of conflicts at the same time we should not create the impression that the world does not have that capacity and as David rightly mentioned the combined GDP of the coalition that stands for Ukraine and for the world order is much much much bigger than Russia and its partners or those who stand behind Hamas including Russia so we do have resources we do have the capacity we seem to have the will what we have to do is to put the will into action questions yes sir a question for Lord Cameron when you're having meetings at Davos at the moment speaking to other world leaders is what's happening at home with the Rwanda Bill an embarrassment to Britain on the world stage and just secondly on asset sieges where are most of the Russian assets frozen currently and which of our partners do you most have to persuade on the points that you've made on the second point on the assets I mean we can get you the figures but there's a substantial amount in the UK but there's an even bigger amount in Europe actually specifically in Brussels because of what's tied up in Euroclear but we can get you the statistics 180 billion 180 billion there's different legal opinions about the best way to do it but there are lots of legal opinions that it can be done and so that's the work that's being done I would say quite the contrary I would say to be frank about this the problem of illegal migration is a problem every country is having to deal with particularly countries in the west and I would say there are if you like two sorts of politicians there are those politicians that realise if you want to deal with this problem it's absolutely fine to talk about dealing with backlogs of asylum seekers which we're doing it's absolutely fine to talk about the collaboration you're going to have with neighbours and partners we're even providing the money as well as collaboration but unless you're prepared to do something that stops this trade in human beings that means that if you take a boat from one perfectly safe country France to another perfectly safe country Britain unless you're prepared to say that if you take that boat you won't be able to stay in the country unless you're prepared to do the innovative thinking of the box thinking then you are a politician that has got nothing to say about solving this problem and I would say that what Rishi Surak and what the government is doing is yes it's quite unorthodox in some ways but it's necessary to do this out of the box thinking to break the model of this appalling people smuggling which is not just something that totally undermines the migration system in the UK it costs so many people their lives and we've seen this week another four people drowning in the freezing cold water of the English Channel on a January night we've got to stop this and so I think as I say you'll find lots of politicians here who've got lots of things they want to do but if they're not prepared to stop the boats if they're not prepared to make sure that people who arrive from a perfectly safe country can't stay they're not going to solve the problem and I think there's a growing understanding for that to lead us from places like Italy and Austria and elsewhere there's a growing understanding that we have to take some of these novel steps if we really want to stop this trade and that's exactly what that bill is all about yes sir a question also for Lord Cameron John Paul Ford Rockhouse from The Daily Mail just on Rwanda again Paul Cagame said today here at Davos that there are limits for how long this can drag on so are you worried that unless this is resolved in the UK that the whole plan may fall apart anyway second question also Lord Cameron you mentioned the UK economy doing well now do you admit that you were wrong back in 2016 to worry as much and warned as much as you did about what would happen to the UK economy after we left Brexit and hasn't Brexit actually been a big success first of all on resolving the situation look the Rwanda bill will have its third reading tonight in Parliament I'm confident it will be passed we have signed this new treaty with Rwanda which puts me on doubt that there are no dangers of asylum seekers being sent back to the country from which they came if they genuinely are asylum seekers the principle of reformal I think that is important and also in response to the Supreme Court judgment there's a huge pack of information that's been published about actually what Rwanda is like as a country in terms of refugees and I would just point out that Rwanda actually hosts schools that are relocated from Sudan it hosts people that are relocated from Afghanistan I think there are over 100,000 people who've claimed asylum who are living and working in Rwanda but of course we want to see this resolved that's what the bill, that's what the treaty that's what the process is all about as for life post 2016 and more particularly life post November 2023 when I came into post I'm very clear that look we made a decision as a country through a democratic referendum which I promised a full two years before an election we held that referendum we're bided by the result of that referendum I've often said this that the country's made its choice and our job now is to make that choice work and I think what we're demonstrating is that Britain is a country that is perfectly capable of making a relationship work where we are friends and neighbours and partners to the EU and we can make a success of that and I think actually our engagement with Ukraine is a classic example of this I was delighted when in Ukraine that Britain was described really as the number one partner and we do that in partnership with EU countries but it's a good example as it were of how we are small enough to be nimble in our help for Ukraine and how we've got out in front of others and really done things that have helped but we're also big enough to matter we are the fifth or sixth largest economy in the world we have one of the some of the finest defence forces in the world one of the best diplomatic networks in the world one of the biggest aid budgets in the world which I'm responsible for and I know those things count in our relationship with countries like Ukraine and in the way we work with the EU Ffarran Sotri, David Cameron and Ffarran Minister for Labour thank you very much indeed for joining us thank you