 Ladies and gentlemen, I want to welcome you all. This is a very special conversation with Sanamarin. Sanamarin, pleasure to have you on. Well, thank you so much for having me. Tell me what the world looks like to you right now. You came in as prime minister in a very different environment. You did not imagine Russia would wage war with Ukraine. You were not somebody who was in particular in favor of Finland becoming a part of NATO. Yet this has become, in a way, the defining aspect of your prime ministership. Where are you in this journey? Well, I was in Davos three years ago. I think not maybe the same date, but about three years ago, I was in Davos and then everything was new. I was just appointed as prime minister and we didn't know what is heading us. And then the pandemic came to the world and we all saw the consequences and have to live with that. After that, the war in Europe, and now Europe is a middle of energy crisis because of the Putin's war in Ukraine. So, a lot has changed during these three years and we have faced so many challenges. Our societies, our citizens have had to face so many challenges and we have had to cope with this. The world today is a very different place than it was three years ago. And right now, the war is not only concerning Ukraine but actually the whole world. The rule-based order has been challenged more and more. Authoritarian regimes are taking more stand in the world and the democratic values are challenged. And this is the new reality, the geopolitical reality that we are in and we have to face that. Not be naive, not be blue eyed, but we really have to face what the world is today. And making hard political choices also making this in mind. So, let's take, that's a very good list of all the issues that the world in particular Europe is facing. Let's take them in a sense one by one. What do you think is happening in the Russian war in Ukraine? It appears from the outside that there is something of a stalemate at this point that does not seem to be as much movement. Ukrainian forces are not liberating cities as fast as they were in November, December. The Russians are dug in. Are we in for a very long slog? Well, of course, we don't know yet. We don't know when the war will end, but we have to make sure that it will end, Ukrainians win. I don't think that there's any other choice. If Russia would win the war, then we would only see decades of this kind of behavior in head of us. I think other countries are looking very closely what is happening now in Ukraine. And if Russia would win, then it would send a message that you can invade another country, you can attack another country and you can gain from that. Land, territory or other things, natural resources or other things, and we have to send a message that is opposite that Russia will lose. It will lose the war. Ukraine will push Russia back to its own territory and that also means crime. It means that Ukraine will be whole again and we together have to make sure that this will become reality, but there isn't a gain of attacking another country. And we have to, of course, stand behind the rule-based order as well. And I really worry about the challenges that we are all facing in this respect. If there isn't rules in the world, what can we depend on? Then it's only rules that have strength. And, for example, Finland is a small country. It's very, very important to us that we have these international rules that everybody obeys to, that we have the human rights, that we have rule-based order, that we have rule law, and that we respect those values and rules. So all that sounds to me, it makes perfect sense, particularly from where Finland is coming, but there are people who say, look, every war ends in some kind of a negotiation. Very few end up with total victory or total defeat. You know, World War II may be the exception. Is at some point, will there have to be a negotiation between Russia and Ukraine? That's for Ukraine to decide. We only need to support. Today, they need our support when it comes to arms. They need more defense material, and we have to give that to Ukrainians. And they need monetary help. They need financial help. They need humanitarian aid. We also have to make sure that when people are fleeing Ukraine, we are welcoming them and making sure that they have all the services, that they have all the support that they need to make their lives as normal as possible. So right now, we have to support Ukraine. And it's them to decide what kind of negotiations they are willing to go, what are the terms that they are willing to accept, and our job is to support them. They will decide themselves what is Ukraine's future. And we can also hope, send a message of hope for that. For example, Ukraine has applied the European Union membership. And I think when they are fulfilling the criteria, we have to welcome them with open arms. We have to give them another path that it's not only a story of war. It's the story after the war. It's the story of hope that they can build their society with our help and that they can become prosperous nation with a good future ahead of them, with a good future for their children. So I hope that even though we are now living in middle of war, all of us in Europe and especially Ukrainians, that's not the only story and the only message. But at the same time, we have to look to the future and hopefully there is a brighter future for Ukraine and Ukrainians ahead of them. Do you think it's inevitable that Ukraine will have to become a member of NATO, whether de facto or de jure, there will be security guarantees provided by the major countries of the West? Well, of course, NATO has its own rules. And if a country is in middle of war, it cannot become a member of NATO. Of course, we can look down the history and ask ourselves the question, should Ukraine already be a member of NATO? Then there wouldn't be a war in Ukraine. And actually, this is why also Finland and Sweden is applying NATO membership. And hopefully the ratification process will go as fast as possible also with the two countries that hasn't ratified yet. We want to become member of NATO because we don't ever again want war in Finland. We have been in war with Russia before. We have very good military capabilities, but we have to make sure that there is also that threat that the Article V gives, that if a NATO country is attacked, others will defend. And also, of course, Finland will defend other countries when becoming a NATO member. You believe that if Ukraine was a member of NATO, if it had already become a member, there would be no war? I'm sure it. If Ukraine would be a member of NATO, there wouldn't be a war now in Ukraine. And actually, we also have to look to the year 2014 when Russia attacked Crimea. Should have we, and I think we should have, acted differently then. If we would have been more strong, if we would pose much harder sanctions, then I think the results of history would have been different. If we have shown strength then as European Union and Allies, I think the story might have been very different than it's today. And we have to learn from this day forward that Europe needs strength. We need more autonomous strength, and we have to make sure that we are not as dependent on authoritarian regimes that we are right now, for example, energy. We are too dependent, and we have become too dependent on Russian energy, and that is causing a lot of problems everywhere in Europe right now. And we have to make sure that in the future, we are learning from this experience. And in the future, we don't build those kind of critical dependencies on authoritarian regimes, but we will deepen our cooperation with our democratic allies and partners. In Finland, for many years, it has been important to maintain good relations with Russia. Your president famously was said to be the Putin's best friend in Europe, and Finland saw it as being important to maintain good relations with Russia because you have a very long and critical border with them. The situation is now very different. Do you have a very hostile, adversarial relationship with Russia right now? Is that, are you experiencing anything coming out of Russia in terms of troop movements, cyber attacks, intelligence buying? Are you seeing a new Russian attitude towards Finland? Well, first of all, I have to say we have had functioning relations with Russia because of our geopolitical reality. We are an extra neighbor with Russia, and in many fields we have had to cope with that, and we have had functional relationship with Russia. I'm trying to explain the Finnish set of mind. The most important thing for Finland and Finnish people is to make sure that we are secure, that we are safe, we are secure, that we are independent nation, and that there isn't threats that are threatening that. So security is very, very important to Finland. And if you ask Finnish citizens how willing they are to defend their own country, we are ranked number one worldwide. The Finnish people, they are most willing to defend their own country, and that's because of our history and the war with Russia that we have had. So we value security and our independence more than anything. And how to make sure that this is the reality. So far, it's been functioning relationship with Russia, not being a member of NATO, having this position. It's the space between, yeah. Yeah, of course, we have been close partners with NATO for a long time, but we haven't been a member because we have thought that this would be the most best way to secure our nation's security. But now the reality is different. Now we see that Russia is attacking another neighbor and we cannot rely on that relations anymore. So we have to seek partnership elsewhere, more close partnership, and that's why we are applying the NATO membership. Is Russia opposing what kind of threats against Finland? I think we have to be prepared for anything. We are not seeing a military threat, a cute military threat against Finland. There isn't any that kind of movement or military movement close to our borders. But of course, we have to be prepared for everything and anything. So we are prepared for cyber attacks, hybrid operations, informational warfare, misinformation, spread all over the internet. And I think this is the reality for every country in Europe. I think this is the reality for every nation in the world. We are seeing the world at a very different place that we thought it would look like. And I think everyone has to be more prepared on different kind of, for example, misinformation that are spread everywhere. And the best way to tackle that is to send the right information, to give the people right information and also making sure that your nation is secure and prepared for different kind of actions and incidents. And at the same time, I have to say also that 100% security, that's not possible. But you have to be prepared and think beforehand what might happen and how you could be more secure even though you might never reach the 100% security. So when Finland and Sweden applied for NATO membership, it seemed as though it was going to happen very, very quickly. But there has been an obstacle, two nations in particular. Let's talk about Turkey. Do you think Turkey's objections to Finland's membership are going to be overcome? Well, I think the process should have been faster. Finland and Sweden, we both take all the boxes when it comes to NATO. We are fully prepared to become NATO members and there shouldn't be any obstacles on the way. Of course, we are still waiting for two countries to ratify. Hungary have said that they will ratify as soon as their parliamentary period will start, hopefully very soon. Turkey, that's another matter and we have discussed and agreed in NATO's Madrid summit about the steps that we will take and we have taken those steps. And now we are waiting for Turkey to ratify. I don't see that there shouldn't be any problems and I have also personally talked with President Erdogan and what he has said also in public that Finland isn't that big of issues with Finland, maybe some with Sweden. But for our perspective, it's very important that Finland and Sweden are going to NATO together because we are sharing the same security environment. What if President Erdogan says I will vote yes on Finland but no on Sweden? Well, of course, we cannot influence and decide for Turkey, but for our perspective, it's very and crucially important and I think also from NATO's perspective, it's crucially important that both Finland and Sweden, that both countries fulfill all the boxes about the NATO membership, that we are applying and we are taking into NATO and all the countries are also handling our application simultaneously. So there shouldn't be any problems with that and we hope that we will be part of NATO together. Do you think if this war in Ukraine lasts three, four years, five years, Europe has the staying power to see it through to continue supporting Ukraine, deterring Russia, dealing with the energy issues that arise out of it? I think the only message that we need to send that we will support Ukraine as long as needed. One year, two years, five years, 10 years, 15 years, we will support Ukraine as long as needed. Let's talk about the energy crisis. Europe has had a warm winter and that has relieved some of the pressure, but in a longer term sense, do you think that Europe is moving fast enough to wean itself off Russian energy? Well, I think we also have now in our hands a possibility to do this. The war has changed the world. We were going towards the Korean transition also before, making the investments in renewables and now we only have to make those faster and we need cooperation, of course, between European countries to do this. We are not only investing about the production of energy, but also with the networks, also with the connections between countries. So we need to invest together. Every country has to invest and we need also those common investments. I think this is a possibility to make that transition a reality and the way it should be towards renewables because we are also tackling with climate change. We are also tackling with loss of biodiversity and those are the biggest threat of humankind. So we need to take this momentum as possibility to make a greener, a better future for our children. But the reality right now in the short run is there is not enough green energy to at the scale that you needed and as quickly as you needed. So Germany is buying coal. You're seeing a lot of liquefied natural gas. Should there be more investments in those areas as transitions or is that turning your back on the green agenda? You see, it seems to me there's a dilemma here. If you need the energy now and you need it to be non-Russian, what is available now today is largely fossil fuels, natural gas and some coal. Should Europe be investing more in that in the short term? Well, of course, we cannot make the green transition within a year. That's a reality. We cannot transform our whole energy system to a greener one within a one year or two years. But all the new investments should go on green transition, not to invest in those fields that are not green. Of course, we have to buy coal and gas and oil from the global markets to Europe right now. But at the same time, we have to invest in green energy. For example, Finland, we have done that already. We are doing it as we speak and we have done and diversified our energy mix beforehand and we have been preparing for different kinds of situations and that's why we are not that dependent on Russian fossil fuels and that's a very good thing. And now we have to make sure that everybody else is on board as well. For example, we are and have been investing in wind power and I think if I remember correctly this year, those energy sources will peak and hopefully also get the prices down quite fast. When you look at Europe's economic future, I'd say the consensus here at Davos seems to be that Europe is going to enter into a recession. Do you agree? That's a possibility and actually it looks likely that Europe will face some kind of recession. And we can of course also affect as countries what kind of recession will that be? Hopefully a very short one. Hopefully we'll go ahead quite fastly. I think right now it's also very important to invest in the future. The transition but not only that also to digitalization also to new technologies, research and development and knowledge and know how education of our citizens because we have to learn from the war not only concerning energy but also other fields and about the huge crisis that we have faced during these past three years. First the pandemic showed us that we are too dependent on certain markets when it comes to medicine and medical supplies. Then the war in Ukraine and the Russian energy showed us that we are too dependent on energy. We are also and we have to make sure that we are not that dependent on food or clean water and defense material. We have to make sure that we can produce the defense material that we need. But not only this, I think the one thing that we are not discussing enough is new technologies. New technologies and the know how and the knowledge that we will need because the future crisis is the future wars, the future conflicts will be about new technologies. We are already seeing that in different parts of the world and we have to make sure that we are investing in these new technologies with our partners. We need cooperation between Europe, United States, Canada and also partners from Asia such as Japan, South Korea, also the Indo-Pacific, Australia, New Zealand, also India. We need our democratic partners working together making sure that we have those trading routes and those solutions when it comes to new technologies. Because if we are dependent on authoritarian regimes when it comes to new technologies, then our economies, our societies will be jeopardized. So what does that mean about Finland and Europe's relations with China? Because so far, the attitude of Europe towards China has been very different from what it now is towards Russia. There's been an open embrace of China, the Chinese market, Chinese investment. China has been a very important market for countries like Germany. Should Europe rethink its relations with China because it is an authoritarian country and there would be inevitably dependencies built if you were to have just simply open trade? I think every democratic nation should rethink its dependencies on China and other authoritarian regimes. I think this is a reality that we are now facing. It doesn't mean decoupling now. It doesn't mean that it's impossible. We are all too connected economically. We are too connected to each other. And I don't mean that we should decouple today. That's not possible. It's not reality. But at the same time, we have to make sure that we have also different sources when it comes to natural resources, when it comes to semiconductor chips or other new technologies that we also have other trading routes, that we also have other sources. For example, it's very important that Intel and others, businesses and companies, are investing in new semiconductor factories, manufacturers in Europe, in the States, in democratic countries. We cannot be dependent on some sources that are under authoritarian regimes. I think everybody has to rethink their way of thinking when it comes to authoritarian regimes. Also, businesses. This is not only a matter of governments and countries, but also private businesses, private sector industries. Because if they are looking now back, I think the Russian investments that they have made have cost them a lot of money. And I think they also have to make that risk analysis, not only a quarter or a year, but also in 10 years term. If we are now investing in authoritarian regimes, what will happen in the future? Will there be a reality where our investments are being socialized, for example? What is happening in Russia right now? It has cost a lot of money to European businesses to be in Russia. You're heading into elections in Finland, and if somebody were to look at your government, one criticism they could make is you've run up a lot of debt. And other European countries have as well, but the level of debt was sustainable in a world of very low interest rates. But if interest rates stay high, could it not be said that you have left a legacy that is going to be very hard to navigate if the interest rates stay high, if interest on the debt stays very high? I think we have to take death very seriously. Not only in Finland, but Europe and elsewhere. I think we are seeing Europe where many countries has a lot of debt. Finland is in the middle, our debt, when you compare it to GDP is about 70%. It's not that high compared to many other countries. And I really worry about the situation in Europe right now where there are many countries that have a lot of debt and also a lot of costs because of that. And that is a threat to all of Europe together because we are so connected. We are sharing the single market. We are sharing common economies. We are in the same eurozone with many countries. So, of course, this is a serious matter for all of us. In Finland, we have taken a lot of debt like many other countries because of the pandemic. We have supported our citizens, our businesses and making sure that unemployment doesn't raise. And actually, when you look at the numbers right now, Finland is now in very good shape when you look at employment, for example. We are in 75% of employment and that was our target when we started as a government to raise that to 75% when we have made that reality. And also in other fields, we have a lot of possibilities. But the economic situation, that is something that we also have to take very seriously and making sure that in the future, our economies and our public economies is better than it is now. I know that you don't like to talk about your role as a very young woman in this very important job. And we don't have to. You know, we don't have to go there. But I'm going to ask you... But there is a public fascination with it. So let me ask you this. Do you think that you have done things... Do you have furthered a women's agenda or certain issues that you understood perhaps better than others might? Has there been some part of that that you look back on and see as a legacy? Well, I think the... And not only think. Most of my time has gone with the major crisis that we have faced. And this would have been the same situation whether there would have been a male prime minister in Finland or not. So no, my gender or my age hasn't affected that much about the agenda that we all have to face during these years. For Finland, gender equality has always been very important globally, but also internally because we are a small nation, a nation of 5.5 million people. And we couldn't cope if we wouldn't use all of the resources of all of our people. And we need everybody on board. Every gender, every generation, we need everyone on board to making sure that Finland will cope and drive in the future. And I think also globally, we are missing an opportunity for a better future if we are neglecting the women's participation, whether it's in private sector or public sector in political life. I think we need everybody on board. Women, men, different genders and different generations. I think everybody has a perspective. And I think when we're listening to everyone, we are making the best decisions. All right, I have time for a little bit of Q&A. You know, kind of only in Davos' moment, we do have the former Prime Minister of Finland, Alex. Here, do you have something you want to add, Alex? Alex will only say Finland is the best country in the world. Thank you very much, Farid, and congratulations, Sanna. Perhaps a personal question, because we've been a little bit in the same boat. And perhaps to a certain extent, changing the institution of a Prime Minister, how have you coped with it personally? Because I felt that at times the personal attacks that were involved in the day-to-day politics, they at least drove me down or gave me a few sleepless nights. But in my mind, you've been coping with it extremely well. What's your defense mechanism? Well, I really don't like this political atmosphere. I think you can relate. I don't like the political atmosphere when we are focusing about the persons. We are focusing about the individual making the decisions, not the decisions itself or the political agendas, I think. I want the politics because I wanted to change the world. I didn't want the politics because I wanted to be a politician. I wanted to change the world a better place. And I think we are discussing too little about the matters, about the agenda, about the values that we stand behind. And we are focusing, and as when I say we, I'm talking about the media, we are focusing too much on the individuals and their personal appearances or looks or how they speak or how they act and are they interesting or not? I don't think that matters at all. I think that matters, and we should focus on that. And how do I cope? I do sports like you do, and I'm very grateful that I have a good, that it doesn't affect my sleep, that I sleep well, even though there are big crises or personal turbulence because of the media. You've been clever enough not to weigh your shorts in public the way that Alex said. Actually, I have. I've been photographed with it. And even shorter. Yeah. Thank you. My name is Paola Escobar Tarri, I'm a Chilean journalist and YGL alumna. So the World Economic Forum last report shows that it is going to take 151 years to achieve gender parity if we continue doing the same things we're doing now. So as a global icon in gender parity issues, what do you think should be done now to change those terrible numbers? Thank you. I don't have an answer to that. I agree that in this route that we are on, it will take too long time. It will take too long time. But I cannot personally make decisions on behalf of everyone. I think gender equality is a serious matter. And I can also see and we can also see that it's been challenged more and more worldwide. For example, if we look at the situation in Iran or Afghanistan, the situation is terrible. It's just terrible. And we need to do more as global community to tackle that pushback against pushback. So we need to do more. But how to reach that reality where gender wouldn't matter? I don't know when we will be there. I think we only have to make sure that we are fighting every day, that we are not taking credit about that progress that we have made, that we have to fight for every day for our values, gender equality, human rights, rule of law. These are not matters that are giving to us. They are matters that we fight for. And hopefully every day. And hopefully the world will become a better place sometime. That is as much time as we have. Sanam and pleasure to have you. Thank you. Thank you so much. It was my pleasure.