 to or any participant to slow down or to pause so you can translate. Just say the word. Teddy, can we let people in? Oh, I just I'm getting some messages. Oh, yes. Okay. Looks like we're up and running. So let's get started. Welcome everybody to this webinar. No war, no warming, environmental consequences of the war in Ukraine. My name is Teddy Ogborn. I am the war is not green camp coordinator with Code Pink, and I'm joined here with some really wonderful panelists for this webinar. We have Nancy Montias from Code Pink, Marcy Winegrab from Code Pink, and we also have Alexei Vasylok from the Ukraine War Environmental Consequences Workgroup. Thank you all for being here. Before we hop into some introductions, I thought it would be really great to start sharing a video clip from the Washington Post that touches really well on the issue we are about to discuss. And so if we could get some help screen sharing that video up until that time code I shared with you, that'd be great. And then we can hop into intros. With every battle and attack, immeasurable amounts of toxic pollutants are dispersed into Ukraine's soil, water, and air, making Ukraine's environment the latest victim in Russia's war. It's important to keep in mind that there's already a lot of toxic chemicals in industrial society independent of military activities. There are about 24,000 environmentally hazardous enterprises or facilities across the country. Most of the heavy industry in Ukraine is located in the east where the fighting is most heavily concentrated. So whether things are targeted or whether they're collateral damage in the conflict, there's this enormous liberation of toxic materials into the environment. In the short run that creates serious health risks through water quality challenges, air quality hazards, and great risk to first responders as well in humanitarian efforts. Ukraine's nuclear infrastructure adds another environmental vulnerability as radioactive materials can cause genetic disorders such as cancer, implants, animals, and humans. The big concern when it comes to nuclear is some sort of a direct strike that would damage one of Ukraine's 15 nuclear reactors, which are concentrated at four sites around the country. The Chernobyl site creates special risks. That site still needs active management by Ukrainian nuclear scientists. It still requires careful monitoring. There are still 20,000 spent fuel rods that are stored in the cooling ponds on site. And so while the idea of a direct strike on nuclear facilities gets all of the attention and raises the fears, and rightly so, we also have to pay attention to this more subtle effect, the constant threat that the war somehow disrupts these vital monitoring and management activities. As history shows, these environmental impacts can have long-term effects, often lasting generations. Thank you. So as we can see from that brief introduction from the Washington Post, the environmental threats posed by the war in Ukraine and war writ large are diverse, difficult to handle and to tackle, and require very specific attention and action. So the order I propose for introductions as we go in as we're... Looks like we have a lost connection with Teddy. Let's give it a couple more minutes and then hopefully he'll join us. If not, I think we'll go ahead and go with his proposed recommendation of speakers, which I believe is myself, Marcy, and then our two guests joining us from the Ukraine. So let's just give it a minute and see if Teddy can join us. Thank you. Okay, well, I'm just going to... Oh, I think this is Teddy. Sorry about that brief interruption, my connection. Nancy, did you get a chance to produce yourself while I was gone or should I go ahead and do that? Because of time, I will just go ahead and do that, Teddy. So is that okay? Okay. My name is Nancy Mencius. I am a campaign organizer with Code Pink, and it is a great pleasure and honor to be here. And I just welcome our friends and comrades from... Joining us from the Ukraine. I stand here in solidarity with you around your work on environmental protection. And I look forward to this webinar and hearing what you have to say today, but I'll just get right into it. Conflicts are cause and contribute to a wide range of environmental problems. This is particularly true when fighting is prolonged, intense, and affects a large geographical area. War impacts urban, industrial, agricultural, terrestrial, and natural marine regions. There are many ways to characterize the damage. It may be direct or indirect, transient or permanent, widespread or localized, cumulative or unique, deliberate or incidental. Both human rights and ecosystems depend on a healthy environment. However, warring parties do not prioritize the planet, do not prioritize people, and do not prioritize animal life. Our partners at the Conflict and Environmental Observatory in the UK indicate that in the first 48 hours of the Ukraine war, the world saw patterns of environmental harm, such as pollution from military sites, nuclear radiation risks, water contamination, the use of weapons, the destruction of industrial infrastructures, the laying of landmines, the permanent scarring of bio and geo diversity. This does not include the high levels of greenhouse gas emissions. Since last February, the damage and disruption to the fossil fuel sites has left a long term effect on the environment and public health. In addition, the war is increasing civilian suffering. Measuring should be taken to minimize the harm to people and ecosystems, together with actions to address the damage already caused and broader questions of our dependence on fossil fuels. More importantly, war is not the answer. When I think of the war in Ukraine, I think of also the war in Iraq, the war in Afghanistan, and I think of the term ecocide. And this is because conflicts generally reveal the limits of state accountability for the environmental harm caused by war. The environmental dimensions of all armed conflicts are becoming ever more visible. There are several reasons for this, social media, citizen journalism, activists such as yourself, improved access to earth observation data, new monitoring methodologies, more organizations and individuals actively collecting data, communication pathways becoming immediate, and all of this because of a strong interest in environmental protection. So even though we watched that clip from the Washington Post, our work around mainstream media is not done. Mainstream media is one sector where environmental dimensions need to be more visible. As part of our war is not green campaign, we are launching a campaign to hold the media accountable, asking them to increase reporting on how militarization, war and conflict directly impact the planet. Please check out the Code Pink website for more information on this campaign, and please visit the Conflict Environment Observatory website as well for more data on this topic. Thank you. It's an honor to be here. Thank you so much, Nancy. Now I'd like to give the floor to Alexey Vasylok, who's joining us from Ukraine. Alexey is an environmental expert representing the Ukraine War Environmental Consequences workgroup, which has been working tirelessly to document the environmental consequences of the war in Ukraine and Russia. Alexey is also a member of the Ukrainian Nature Conservation Group, and we're really excited to have him here. Alexey, if you'd like to introduce yourself a little bit and talk about your work. Thank you. My name is Alexey Vasylok. Indeed, you were right. I'm the leader of the Ukrainian Nature Conservation Group, the non-governmental organization that is dedicated, whose activity is dedicated to nature conservation in Ukraine. Also, I'm a representative of UWEK, this international initiative. Also, I'm a researcher at the Institute of Zoology, National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, and through my whole life I have been working as a nature conservationist since 2000. It sounds interesting. Yes, and especially I'm warned about the ecological consequences of war, especially in the form that Russia does this war as it possesses a lot of dangers for natural biodiversity, natural and wild ecosystems. And to my mind during the last 1,000 years, this is the biggest and the most massive disaster for Ukrainian wildlife. Yes, and I think that it's all, and Alexey will tell us more information later, answering your questions. Okay, thank you so much, Alexey. Lastly, I'd like to bring up Marcy Wynigrad from Code Pink. Marcy Wynigrad is the coordinator of Code Pink Congress. She's a long-time anti-war activist who serves as a 2020 DNC delegate to Bernie Sanders and co-founded the Progressive Caucus of the California Democratic Party. Marcy's activism began in high school when she marched against the Vietnam War. An elevator joined the defense team of Pentagon Papers, Wilson Blower, Daniel Ellsberg. Retired English and government teacher, Marcy blogs about militarism and foreign policy at laprogressive.com. I'm joining with Code Pink. Marcy says I'm honored to work with such creative and committed activists and look forward to mobilizing co-sponsors and congressional votes for peace legislation. Wonderful to have you on board. Marcy, for this call. Thank you. Thank you, Teddy. Thank you, Nancy. My colleagues at Code Pink and really heartfelt thank you to our Ukrainian friends who are joining us today. I am with Code Pink. I co-host Code Pink Congress and I'm also the chair of our peace and Ukraine coalition. I'll talk more about that in a minute, but first we just wanted to share a couple of photographs that bring to life the devastation that is occurring as a result of this war in Ukraine. So, Teddy, if you can bring up the first photograph. Okay, so one of the issues is the attacks, you know, these Russian attacks on oil storage facilities and chemical plants are releasing horrific particulate matter. You can see all this smoke. So air pollution is a serious problem as a result of this invasion and not only the invasion but the ongoing fighting and the U.S. funding of the continuation of this war. And we can go to the next picture. We'll see some more evidence. There we have an attack on an oil. I believe this is an oil storage facility in Odessa. Fires raging across that area. And then what, you know, what mentioned was made of wildlife. We, I've read reports of 50 to 100,000 dolphins washing up dead in the Black Sea as a result of some of the detonations there. Both sides involved with that. And then I read that there's a lot of deforestation underway. We see threats to our carbon sink as a result of kind of a free for all right now in Ukraine is what it sounds like. Our Ukrainian brothers would know more, certainly, but it sounds like people are free to cut down and deforest to sell the wood to survive. So those are just some photographs that are indicative of what we're facing in terms of environmental destruction. I do want to say that our peace and Ukraine coalition, we can bring up the website, Teddy. We are a coalition of over 100 organizations, most of them in the United States, but certainly not all who are calling for a ceasefire, peace negotiations, and no more weapons to Ukraine. It's not that we want to see anyone defenseless. We certainly don't. We understand, however, that by sending more and more weapons from rockets to missiles, now to tanks, we are continuing and endless a perpetual war. Are you able to bring up that website? Do I need to do anything? PeaceInUkraine.org and then we can see what kind of work we've been doing. Here we go. Getting there. Okay, so it's peaceInUkraine.org. No worries. We have been hosting weeks of action. We're in the middle of one right now. We're asking people to show up in front of their lawmakers offices and protest the weapons flow. We say, you know, this war is not going to be resolved, excuse me, on the battlefield. It's going to be resolved through diplomatic efforts. Okay, so if we go to news and press up there and to the bottom, January, weeks of action. Yeah, there we go. So we had a protest in New York recently. We also had one in San Francisco. If you scroll down, you can see a photograph from San Francisco, Silver Spring, Maryland. Stop the war, save the climate. Yeah, and keep going. Raleigh, North Carolina. And there we go. Santa Barbara. That's where I am in Santa Barbara, California on Chumashland. We also have, I just, so people see this as a resource under our resources section. We have, we click on resources at the top there. We talk about Medea Benjamin's book tour. Medea is the co-founder with Jodi Evans of Code Pink. She's written her book, War in Ukraine, Making Sense of a Senseless Conflict. She's on tour throughout the United States. We also have talking points, statements, petitions, and more for tabling. And again, you know, we don't see an end to this ecocide without an end to the weapons. We see this as a US Russia proxy war at this point that is sacrificing Ukrainian lives to what? To maintain a unipolar world with the US on top. Anyway, I encourage everybody here to check out the resources section and join us at the Peace and Ukraine Coalition on our homepage. And with that, I'll turn it back to you, Teddy. Thank you. Thanks so much for sharing those wonderful resources and all the work that you are doing to work towards peace and also an eventual healing of the environment there in Ukraine, which I know Alexi is already hard at work doing this very challenging work. So I do want to pose a first question to Alexi, which is, what are some of the challenges that you encounter in the work that you're doing, whether that's challenges faced by maybe other Ukrainian NGOs or the Ukrainian government? Is there any resistance to the kind of work? From the point of view of military activities. Well, of course, it's difficult to deal with any activity of the experts, representatives of the public organizations and scientists during the war. Part of the experts and scientists are now in the armed forces and there are participants in the combat activities. They cannot deal with research and analysis. Russia is constantly attacking the energy system. And in those days, we may not have electricity and no communication, even mobile. And the first obstacle is the inability to work normally because there is no light and part of the experts, or not now in the military activities, in general, have left the territory of Ukraine at a higher level. Okay, so the first and to my mind the main challenge in our work is that part of our experts, part of scientists and environmentalists were recruited to Ukrainian army and they are now defending our land, defending our country against the occupants. And the second part of this first big challenge is the permanent and regular or irregular blackouts due to the mass destruction of our power stations after the rocket shelling. And this prevents us from doing our work normally on a regular base. So for example, when you can't work during the whole day and you have electricity only during several hours in the night, of course, it's really harmful for our productivity. And also part of the experts and the environmentalists, they are now refugees. So either they are in early replaced persons or they are refugees somewhere in Europe and other countries. So they can do their work normally and regularly. The second problem is that we can't even get to those territories that are already free from Russian occupation, because obviously, where the territory is occupied, we can't get there, where active militia are going, we can't get there, but where it's free, we can't get to those territories either, because they are too important. And how much war has captured one fifth of the territory of Ukraine, and this is a territory more than a territory of Romania, a territory more than a territory of Belarus. And these territories simply do not have the resources to replace them during the war. It will take a lot of decades. And that's why now how many such resources do not have, it's just that no one, the military, does not allow people to return to the territory, where the militia was occupied, or where they can be replaced. It is very difficult to conduct real field research, this is the second. Okay, the second main challenge is that all of us are civilians, and the area that was under any type of war actions is really enormous. It's bigger than, for example, Romania or Belarus. It's literally one fifth part of the entire territory of our country. And you can imagine the amount of explosives, amount of different types of dangerous things that are still buried somewhere under the soils, somewhere hidden somewhere, or just laying somewhere that can, that still can kill people. And of course, this territory is so enormous that all power, all possibilities of our army are not enough to make it safe again. And as a result, we as civilians, as scientists, we don't have normal access to the territories. Of course, it's normally not having access to the frontline, because we are civilians, we have nothing to do there. And, but even we don't have direct access to the territories that were occupied, because they are still dangerous. And it's still a really big chance that not all of us will come back after each expedition. So we assume that it will take a lot of time, many, many years to make these territories safe again and to go there and see what happened and try to assess the consequences of these war actions. And it's clear that when it's time to analyze the air pollution or the water in general, it's funny, because in a minute there will be no air pollution in the same place, and the water pollution. And the pollution that was caused by the guarantee is gradually getting deeper and deeper. And therefore, in reality, later, not in time of the war actions, but when it is in time of the war actions, we will not be able to receive reliable information from any probes. Okay, and this challenge number two leads us to the challenge number three, because it is useful to try to track the changes, to try to track the pollution when, so immediately after the explosion or other action took time. So for example, but we can't do this and we will be able to do any measurements or collect any samples for identification for further investigation. Only a very long time after this action took place. So it is almost impossible right now to make a start point in the normal investigation of these consequences, because during the gunplay, during the heavy assault on the frontline, we have pollution of air, we have pollution of water, pollution of soil. The pollution of air will change like the next day, the pollution of soil will be also will also fade because with the rains, with water, so all the chemicals will be spread and transferred to local rivers. And therefore, the inability to be there at the very time of the explosion, the very time of the gunplay. Of course, it's wise because we can't do anything there, we can't stop the gunplay and say, okay, guys, can you please stop, we need to do some measurements. Yeah. Yeah, so we are unable to do this and this literally, I would not say it's spoiled, but makes our further investigations worse than they could be. And therefore, any types of assessments, any types of approximations or any types of counts are arguable and cannot be believed on 100% because none of them can really measure the amount of pollution, the amount of pollutants in the air or water or soil at the moment of explosion. And all the assessment, all the figures that we might see will have a really, really big part of approximation, a really, really big part of, let us say, theoretical calculations that are not based on the actual measurements. They will be actually based on some measurements, like for example, on some polygons, on some, I don't know, on some trials, for example, when, okay, our, so the army can, for example, make an explosion and then allow to collect the samples. But this is a really, really tiny part and we don't believe that it gives us all the information that we need. And yet a worse situation when we want to assess the impact on the environment. We can see the consequences of the war, the conditions of explosions, the burning of the territory, the places that were used for building trenches, fortifications, and we see that this is really a colossal ruin of the great nature. But we don't know the same types and the quantities that were on this branch. And this means that we cannot say how many of them have disappeared. If again, we try to assess something as many as possible. And the second point is that when we, if we try to assess the consequences for local biodiversity, for example, for plants and animals, it is even more complicated thing because, okay, after the explosion, we can see a hole in the ground, we can see some burnt machines, we can see burnt trees, etc. But we can't tell what was the biodiversity in this time before the shelling, at the moment of shelling, at the moment of the war. And therefore we have nothing to compare with when we appear there after the war. So we can just track the, we can just see the results, but we will be completely unable to compare it without a big part of approximation in our assessments. But it doesn't mean that we can't give the expert assessment and test the changes that have taken place in the surrounding environment. And therefore our main task is to understand that the consequences of the war, the consequences of the Russian invasion in our nature and in our agricultural territories, because this knowledge depends on the decision how to continue to behave with these territories in the interests of people and nature. And that's why we in UNCG and in UVAC, we try not to give the numbers, we try not to give the counts, so the quantitative assessment of the consequences of war. But still we, as experts and as people who are closer to this to this situation, we still can give some qualitative assessments. And anyway, even without the correct and 100% believable numbers, qualitative assessments will also, are also helpful and they also help to understand what is going on and what might and what consequences might be. So it is a big part of theory, but still it helps. And the fact that the war caused a colossal displacement of people. Fifteen million people, that's a third of the Ukrainians, became refugees, out of them seven million went abroad. This completely changes the advantage of people's idealism in nature. Another my concern is that our media don't talk about other part of the war consequence, because all we understand that, for example, explosions, war machines, chemicals and etc. on the front line, they are harmful. But sometimes we usually forget about the migration, so the wave of migration that the war caused. Just if I remember correctly, 15 millions of people of Ukrainian population had to move somewhere from their home places. So they either moved to other parts of Ukraine or they are refugees now somewhere in Europe, America and other countries. Approximately 7 million people left Ukraine since the beginning of the war and you can only imagine how the balance changed. So how the balance in using of resources changed. So this, so to my mind, this part of war consequence should also be strongly addressed and discussed and taken into account when assessing the consequences of war. Because, for example, we cannot count the amount of explosives that are now in the soil, but we can count how much resources the people that are now refugees consume and how they change the local balance. You all saw a video, a place where the war is taking place in Ukraine, a video, a photo, this is a place where hundreds of thousands of explosives are fired. And this territory, in our opinion, is now so polluted that it is unlikely that after the end of the war there will be a chance to grow food products. Faster than ever, in the places where there were powerful fights, nothing can be more developed. People will not be able to return to these territories after the war, to what was before that. And, accordingly, our task now is to understand in what direction to let the future of Ukraine after the war, so that it is profitable for people and for people and for nature. Because as it was before the war, it will no longer exist. And the deepest part of my concern is that all of you saw the videos and photos, I think, dozens of them from the front line, with these huge craters from the explosions, with the burned machines, with the dead soldiers and so on. So you can imagine how much pollutants are now in the soil. And the worst problem is that even if war ends tomorrow or in a week on these territories, people will have no opportunity. It will be prohibited to grow crops, to go back there for normal living. So all these territories, they are completely lost for decades and they cannot be used anymore in agriculture and for normal living of local population. And when the war ends, the biggest problem for Ukraine and for the whole world will be how we are going to build our future, taking this into account, taking into account that at least one fifth part of our country cannot be used for normal living at all. So we will need to think how to organize everything so that both people that suffered a lot, who lost their homes, lost their relatives, lost their loved ones, can go back to their homeland and live in peace. And at the same time, how to allow nature to remain, how to allow nature to recover from this and not lose the wild nature completely. Because it's my personal comment because, for example, if we have a certain area of field that used to produce some crops, for example, and the Donbas and these steppe areas that are now under occupations, they had a lot of such areas where we used to grow different crops and other agriculture things. And now they are out of service and nobody will be able to grow there anything because of explosives, because of pollutants and all that grows there, any plant, any tomato that grows there will be absolutely prohibited for consumption. It will be dangerous. So this is also, and where to take and where to get the new areas for agriculture is a really big question. And so far, we have no answer for this or we are afraid of having an answer for this. Thank you. Yeah, thank you so much, Olexi, for that really wide reaching explanation of the regional consequences there on the ground. The harrowing sites of war, like you said, are tragic already and the human loss associated with them. And now with the understanding of the environmental degradation that may last decades from now, it is really important for us to be having that conversation as we talk about pathways towards peace and healing the environment there at the side of the conflict. I believe Nancy had a comment in response to Olexi here. So Nancy, if you want to take that. Yeah, sure. Just really quickly, when I hear about prolonged effects, I think of Hiroshima, Nagasaki and how the atomic bomb completely changed the landscape and changed the lives of tens of thousands, millions of people and how long it's taken for that area to recover. And I just want to thank my Ukrainian brothers for being here today and for sharing their experience. And I just pray for a swift end to this war. But really what I wanted to comment on is we are part of a climate and militarism working group. We were at the COP 27 in Sharmal Sheikh, Egypt. And some of our partners participated in a side event with the Ukrainian Ministry for Environmental Protections and Natural Resources. And they did put out a report on the climate damage in Ukraine late last month. And I understand that trying to measure and trying to gather data in the midst of war is going to provide inaccurate samples or data. But there was an attempt to provide kind of an overview in this report. And the great thing about this event is that the minister brought the discussion of military emissions to the largest climate event in the world. They brought the discussion of war and how it affects the environment. So I applaud the foresight in this initiative that the people in Ukraine are taking to force the world to have this conversation. But I'm just going to say that the report is called Climate Damage Caused by Russia's War in Ukraine and Initiative on Greenhouse Gas Accountability of War. So people want to google that. So anyway, I just wanted to bring that up and I appreciate what you have to say today. Thank you. Yeah, by the way, so Alexey, he more or less understand what you're talking about. So and I will just ask him if he needs any assistance in translation. So not quite correct and adequate data, but all the same, it is very important for us that this question is raised, that Ukraine raised this question. Hey Nancy, thank you very much for your words. Thank you very much for addressing the question that Ukraine raised on that summit. And Alexey just wanted to add that even if war is now taking place only on the Ukrainian territory, all the world is suffering from its consequences. So of course, if we have a lot of air pollution here, for example, as a result of burning of oil stations, burning of different war machines and so on, so it might cause acidic rains, for example, somewhere in USA, somewhere in the nearest countries, or if we lose our forests somewhere on the front line, because on some photos you might see that all forests they're just burned down. They're like spikes of really giant hedgehog that is sitting in the ground because all the trunks of the trees are just burnt and they are just sticking out of the ground. Yes, and exactly the same thing I would like to address on this webinar is that the war in Ukraine is a disaster for the whole world. And we are now sitting here in a comfortable Zoom online conversation, but all of us, it doesn't matter where we are on our place or your place, all of us suffer from this war and its consequences. Thank you. Thank you so much for really articulately putting the risks to all of us here on planet Earth who breathe air and rely on our environment to survive because of the war in Ukraine. That's really, really well put. I believe Marcy has a question. Yes. Thank you so much, Alexi, for pointing out how the war is jeopardizing global climate security. I'm wondering what you think about the importance of diplomatic efforts to resolve this sooner rather than later as horrific as the environmental destruction that we witness right now. I imagine that would be exponentially increased should this war widen to include more of Europe. So I'm wondering what your position is on this, the sending of weapons to Ukraine to continue the war or if you have wrestled with this question. Thank you for a question. Thank you so much for the opportunity to help and be more profitable. Well, I think that most of the Ukrainians, I don't think that the war can be resolved as a military way. Because we see our destroyed cities, we see the death of the Ukrainians from the rocket that are flying exceptionally in civilian objects, in residential masses. And we see a large number of Ukrainians who were just killed by the Russians in peaceful cities during the time when these cities were occupied. So I think that, in principle, the good idea of peaceful settlement of any conflict now does not work only because Russia is not paid for any price. Russia is not suitable for peace, because its goal is to capture Ukraine. And that's why, in principle, I am a person who has always been a part of the idea of a peaceful settlement. But now, the military settlement is at least some guarantee of elimination of Ukrainians. Thank you very much for your question, Merci. I think that you saw that a lot of people are now dying in Ukraine, especially in the occupied cities and in the occupied cities and towns like Buchia, European, Hostomel, and so on. We found thousands of dead people, civilians, actually, who were killed, who were murdered, and the burden collective graveyards and so on. Actually, the idea, the whole idea of diplomatic end of the war, of any conflict, so the diplomatic end of any conflict is good, and it is beneficial and more preferable for all the sides. But it won't work in this particular situation, because Russia is not aimed to stop this conflict. Its only aim is the occupation of Ukraine, occupation of our resources, destroy of our infrastructure, killing of millions and millions of civilian Ukrainians. And unfortunately, unfortunately, they have no intention, no visible intention, for diplomatic end of this conflict. Of course, we would be happy if the diplomacy helps to stop the conflict and to stop the war. But at this point, with this type of war that is going right now against us, unfortunately, it is impossible. Thank you. And as our president stated many, many times in the media, we are ready for diplomacy, we are ready for a peaceful end of this conflict only after Russian military forces, after the occupants will leave the territory of Ukraine and all the territory of Ukraine in the borders that are internationally witnessed at the moment of 1991, we will be freed and we will have complete control on our territory. Yeah, and this is, and the type of this war is quite simple. One part is attacking and the other part is defending, defending ourselves, defending our families, our children and our lives, because if we stop doing this, we will be killed. And all of Ukraine will stop existing on the map of the world. So until Russia stops these attacks, until the Russia have its military forces on the territories of Ukraine that are internationally confirmed, unfortunately, this type of war can be won and can be ended only with the military part, only with the military approach. Okay, then I'd like to respond at some point. Okay, this is the last comment and then, okay, so and the type of weapon that Ukraine now receives from USA from other countries is a highly accurate types of weapons. So when Russia uses types of weapon that destroys everything in front of them, their main aim is mass destruction, the type of weapon that we receive from our partners, from our friends, is the highly accurate types of weapons that are aimed only to defend Ukrainian critical infrastructure and to get rid of their key hubs like storages, the storages of weapons, storages of artillery systems and so on. So these types of weapons are not given to us at the moment, so we will soon have one year of the war and every type of weapon is closely discussed and is giving us very, very carefully. Thank you. Thank you. I just wanted to respond and first say that, you know, Code Pink and the Peace and Ukraine Coalition, which I chair, both oppose the Russian invasion, Code Pink opposes this invasion as a criminal attack on Ukraine. That being said, we hold our own government, the United States government, largely responsible for this situation, having undermined the Minsk Peace Accord, sending arms into Ukraine, promoting the expansion of NATO, the support for NATO, for Ukraine as an enhanced opportunity partner, de facto NATO member. For continuing now, we're exceeding $105 billion to continue this war in Ukraine. Much of that is a money laundering scheme for military contractors in the United States. We want to see our government promote vigorous diplomacy, whatever it takes to end this war before it gets even worse. We see the environmental destruction that's underway, as you have so vividly pointed out, and we don't see this ending only getting worse with continued fighting. For every attack that is launched, either from the Russians or the Ukrainians, every counterattack and so forth, it just ups the ante. And we don't see a military solution short of a decades-long war, as we saw in Afghanistan, a wider world war that risks the use of nuclear weapons between the United States and Russia. So my message or my hope to our friends in Ukraine who are so concerned, as are we, about the preservation of our climate, of our environment is to do whatever we can to push those involved to meet, to work out a diplomatic solution, and to stop all of the killing and the ecocide. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you. Unfortunately, Alexei, if you could, we are a little over the call, if you want to respond with a few sentences, that's fine, but then I'll end the call. Is that okay? Okay. Thank you. Well, thank you. Yeah, we are about 10 minutes over the call, and of course, it's really important to address the issues that we've just begun discussing between Marci and Alexei. The big takeaway, of course, is that war is awful for the environment, right? We know war here is destroying the homes and lives of many and is degrading farmland and viability for decades to come is what we've been discussing and really crucial for us to take with us out of this call as we continue for various strategies to oppose war. So thank you so much, Alexei. Both Alexei's actually for your participation today. Marci really appreciate your contributions as well. Thank you, Tamaha, for hosting the call, and Nancy, who had to hop off. Thank you as well. It's been such a pleasure having you all. Thank you. Thank you very much.