 Good afternoon from Geneva. Thank you for joining this resetting geopolitics leadership panel. The Davao's agenda has been a week of action-oriented dialogue on key priorities, building crisis resilient health systems, shaping inclusive economies, accelerating climate action. But the single ingredient required for achieving all these ambitions is greater multilateral and multistakeholder cooperation. But cooperation hasn't always been easy to come by as we all know. Indeed, we have seen the consequences of fractured responses to COVID-19, pandemic, over two million lives lost, and the global economy that have contracted 3.5%. Unless we take corrective action, we risk an incomplete and uneven recovery and less resilience in the face of the next challenge. This is why I can think of no better panel to explore how we rebuild and revitalize global partnerships. The leaders here today have shown what greater cooperation can look like, whatever that is between business, government, and at the regional level or globally. So I'm very pleased to have with us Arancha Gonzales, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, European Union and Cooperation of Spain. Welcome. François-Philippe Champagne, the Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry of Canada. He used to be the Minister of Foreign Affairs just recently, and Ernesto Araujo, the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Brazil. So this is a super great panel and Minister Gonzales Arancha, you have at an early phase of this pandemic said this is the time to come together and collaborate. I think you got a lot of support on that, but recently we have seen more competition and lately we even seen some vaccination nationalism out there. So were you too optimistic or do you see also light in the end of the tunnel on cooperation? Well, to the first, before we start, Borget, thank you very much for this invitation and thank you to the World Economic Forum for obliging us to take a little bit of time and think in order to act a little bit better. You provided us this opportunity at the beginning of the crisis, and yes, I said that I thought cooperation was the way. And frankly, to cooperation skeptics, I think this pandemic has proven that cooperation is the most promising avenue, the most effective one. We wouldn't have been able to develop a vaccine in less than a year if it hadn't been for international cooperation. By the way, public and private. We wouldn't have been able to ensure liquidity trickles down to the smallest economies if it hadn't been by pulling financial resources through international cooperation. Certainly, this is the lesson we've learned in Europe. And we wouldn't be able to sequence the different COVID strains if it is not through pulling data. So cooperation is proving the most efficient way to deal with the pandemic and its impact. I want to take the question that you put to me, which is the one on vaccines. I think, as I said, we wouldn't have been able to develop this vaccine, were it not for a huge public, private effort, the brains of our scientists, the power of pharmaceutical companies and the public financing of governments that have been injected in incredible amounts to ensure we develop this together. And now we need to make sure that everyone has equitable access to the vaccine. This is why Spain has just last week released our own plan for solidarity for COVID vaccines. It's our vision. We will not be safe. None of us will be until all of us are. And this is why we need equitable access to vaccine. And this is why vaccines nationalism is not good. But it's it's also not going to help us that pharmaceutical companies or let me say some pharmaceutical companies don't meet the contracts that they've signed with governments. So I think what we need to do in the next months is continue with this spirit of public-private partnership with governments. Continue to inject resources with private companies like so many of them, private pharmaceutical companies, continue to ensure the vaccines reach those who have purchased them, meeting their obligations and all of us working together, public and private, to ensure vaccines reach everyone, including poorer countries and making sure that we do this through an internationally agreed mechanism, which is COVAX in the in the World Health Organization. So that's Borge, no fan of nationalism, but also no fan of companies not meeting their obligations and a big fan of public and private to ensure vaccines reach each and every citizen around the world. No, thank you so much. Many important things to follow up on there. Just one point related to what we mobilized in less than a year with all these vaccines usually takes, as you said, eight to 10 years to see these results. I think this shows also that the private sector can really, really support. But I think, as you said, you're also a bit disappointed now with the delivery not coming. How serious do you think this situation is? And what measures do governments really have when you see these critical delays? Well, I think some delays are, let's say, unavoidable. We've had little hiccups here and there. Pfizer has had them. Moderna has had them. But there's been a real disposition on the part of the company to explain, to be transparent and to help in all of us, including citizens, understand the specific of their challenges, which is basically scaling up in a massive way to deliver vaccines to every citizen as soon as possible. But I think we need to see this behavior in all pharmaceutical companies. This is a very important moment, again, for governments, but also for the private sector. And in particular, this important sector of our economy that is indispensable for the fight against COVID, which is pharmaceutical companies. Sam has a bit of work to do in ensuring greater transparency and in meeting the requirements of the contracts they have signed. We have to be very transparent about that is part of building confidence. And in doing all of this, being mindful that the purpose of all of this, of this public private endeavor is to ensure equitable access to the vaccine, not just for Europeans or Americans or Chinese or Russians or Canadians or Brazilians for every citizen in every country of this. Well, that's the challenge we face. And so we need good behavior on the side of governments. We need good behavior on the side of pharmaceutical companies. We in Spain are working very closely with the European Commission, who's been the spokesperson for Europe on negotiating access to vaccines and ensuring equitable access for every European citizen to make sure every company with whom they have the commission has negotiated an agreement meets the terms of the contract. Thank you so much. Over to you, François-Philippe Champagne. Just on the vaccination would be very interesting also how Canada's strategy is on this. And also one point that was mentioned by Minister Arancha Gonzalez is that if we don't fight COVID everywhere, you will then develop possibly new strains and variants in those countries that are not vaccinated. And then the virus can mutate and then it hits you back big time and either vaccines are not 100% working or you have to go into a situation where you have to vaccinate people every fall like you do with the flu. So there are many, many kind of challenges there. I don't think we're yet out of the woods. I don't know how you look at it. Well, first of all, thank you, Borgen. Thank you to the Wally Konrich from for fostering discussion and understanding. I mean, you've been doing that for decades and I cannot think of a better time to come together. And I would say I would subscribe to what Arancha said. You know, from the get go, we all realize that the vaccine needs to be a public good. We realize that cooperation is the only way forward. And I think to your point, I would say we're in the second wave. And we already need, I would say, some insurance policy for the new variants. It's not only about the vaccine that we need now, obviously, but we need to look ahead to be better prepared. I think if there's one lessons learned from that is that the world is both fragile and resilient. And I think that we have demonstrated collectively that no charges is too big when we work together. And therefore, I think we need to do that. If I think about what's coming up and the opportunities, I think to some of the questions that were raised, countries are going to develop new industrial policies. I can see, and I'm happy to come in more detail, opportunities around supply chain, opportunity around the digital economy, and also opportunities around science diplomacy. I think that we have learned that we get better outcome when we follow the science, and whether it's technology, innovation. And I think that this is one area I would think Borges where if there is one lesson learned for this world, is that the best way to tackle some of the big challenges. Today is a health challenge, but I think we can all agree that the next big one, or the one which is even bigger, which is now is climate change. And I think to colleagues around the world what we've been, what we're going to be looking at is kind of science diplomacy. How can, as my dear friend Arancha said, how can we pull together science, technology, innovation to tackle the big challenges in front of us? With your new portfolio business and economy, we know Canada is a G7 economy. You're one of the big ones in this field. You saw the IMF report that came out on Tuesday this week. The global growth looks a bit better this year than we expected. I guess that's also based on the fact that there is vaccination going on. Global garments have launched 12 trillion US dollars in stimulus, and more is on its way. We're doing whatever it takes, but I guess that there will be a situation also down the road where you cannot continue to increase debt. And you have to also rely then on the growth taking on its own way of growth. And there may be also private sector will have to play a more important role because the fiscal muscles of garments are limited, and we can also then mobilize private sector. Maybe you can say something about that and also related to the situation in Canada. Well, I fully agree with you. I mean, speaking with some economists, some of them see the rate of vaccination as a proxy for growth. I think everyone understand that we need to save lives and livelihoods and certainly vaccination is the key component to that, to get to an economic recovery. And to your point, and I wanted to touch on the private sector, I mean, I think all of us in government would say government can do big things. I think we have demonstrated that government matters, particularly in this pandemic. But I would say government can do things, I can do big things. But the partnership, and I want to mention that between the public and private sector has allowed us to do big things fast. And then I think to me is a big learning in terms of the only way to tackle these big challenges is to work together. I mean, if you look around the world, whether it's personal protective equipment, whether it's about vaccines, whether it's about ventilators, you saw firm innovate, you saw firm retool, re-engineer to meet the challenge. And for me, that's inspiring because if you're thinking about jobs and growth, I think there's two trends. There's decarbonization and digitization. That's why in my previous intervention, I talk about almost the digital economy or let's say the economy. I think many have said it's the everything today. And I think that when you want to tackle some of the challenges you just said, Borger, I think growth and jobs is key to that. First, we need to make sure that we protect, we vaccinate our population. But at the same time, we already need to take actions for a long term vision, which I think, you know, I think supply chains will be redefined. I think we'll go to go from global to regional. Many have said that people will put more emphasis on resilience as opposed to efficiency, stability, predictability, security of supplies. For me, I think I've heard that time and time again. When it comes to the digital economy, I mean, you've said it, I think the weft, I think it's something like 52 percent of the world population, which is connected 1.5 billion smartphones. I mean, clearly the world is going in that direction. So how can we use somehow the opportunity we have now to make sure that we rescale the ritual for that economy? And again, I think all of that is going to lead to new industrial policies, which are going to bring new alliances. I really believe in the power of alliances. We've seen it during the COVID pandemic, countries come together. I think when it comes to industrial policy, we'll have to do that. Put citizens first, their needs first, and certainly we'll want to work with colleagues around the world. Just a short question before we go to Ernesto Arroyo. You know, since last time we met, we had had elections in the U.S. and also a new president. We know that the situation between the G2, the U.S. and China is quite difficult. Canada is a big trading partner with the U.S. How worried are you that this geopolitical tension and this decoupling, the two systems can have negative impact on future growth? And I think you, as the foreign minister, you had dialogue with China on your particular challenges, but you also had challenges with the former administration. So now you can share with us very freely, you know, reflections on this. I like the way you put it very freely. Listen, clearly, I think I've said it before, the election of President Biden and the administration, I think it's good news. I think from our perspective, as you know, we have so much of integrated supply chain. I mean, we exchanged $2 billion a day in terms of trade and two thirds of the states of the United States of Canada as their first market. Actually, the U.S. sells more to Canada than China, Japan and the UK combined. So sometime I say we've been blessed by geography and our destiny is someone joined that a decision on one side of the border will have an impact on both. But I think it offers opportunities not only for Canada. And let me say, I think, for example, on the fight for COVID, I think there's more opportunities to share. And I saw you had Dr. Fauci on some of your panel. I hope we can in the science diplomacy do more together. I think also in the economic recovery, there's a sense that hopefully we can work more together. And I think these supply chain will be key as we retool them for the world. And on the decoupling and you mentioned technology, I think we'll have to to to reflect on that. And I'm taking our colleagues who are here and those who join us. There's certainly a competition. There's a race for standards. There's a race for rules and regulation. And I think we it's incumbent upon us, I would say, the democracies of the world to come together also about a governance to make sure that technologies are the service of people. And I think that this is the type of things we can work together. And the fact that he has appointed Senator Kerry to be the climate change. Sorry, I think this is the news for all of us, because now we have someone in the White House. It's a very strong message to the world that the US wants to be an active player. And I think that opens up the whole clean tech market. And that could really transform, I would say, economies and bring us to a world which is, you know, going to net zero. And I think anything we can do to accelerate on that fund would be a good thing. Thank you so much, François Philippe. No, Ternesto Arario, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Brazil. Brazil is in a very important BRICS country. You're also a giant in your part of the world. And I think your relationship with the US is, of course, important, but also your relationship with China. I think you said, Minister, recently that it's important of a greater mutual understanding between Brazil and the US. Over to you. That's right. Thank you, Bergen. Yes, any change in the United States is immensely important for us and immensely important for the whole world. Basically, what I think is that we need the United States to remain the superpower of freedom. We need the United States to keep playing that role that they have been playing for 100 years or more around the world. So if the administration wants to focus so much on climate change, I think that's great, Brazil is also focusing on climate change. But what we think is the core and should be the core and we want to be the core of our relationship is the fundamental concept of freedom and liberty. So that's where we want to build our partnership with the United States on. And for that you need, of course, mutual understanding in the sense of also Brazil being perceived as what we are, what Brazil stands for today, which is democracy, an open economy. We come from decades where Brazil had a semi state run economy with lots of corruption. And we are trying to overcome that and we need key partners, not only the United States, but the US is a key partner. But also the countries of my friends here represented the Canada, Spain, European Union. We need those key partners to rebuild Brazil as a modern economy and really as a force for democracy in the region and in the world. So with the United States in particular, it's a key relationship to promote democracy in the hemisphere, in the Western hemisphere. Tremendous challenges are there for democracy against democracy now, especially the connection between organized crime and certain political currents in the region. We have to face that head on with the United States and all other partners that have been standing for democracy in the region. And around the world, we also see challenges to democracy. In that case, what we see as a challenge is the emergence of some sort of maybe it's too much to say that, but I will use the expression a techno-totalitarianism, which is this way of and it's not a question of US against China or China against the US. It's a question of different models of society that are emerging with the new technologies. And new technologies can be great for democracy, but they can also provide the means for total control societies. And we don't want those. And big tech companies can work for freedom, but they also can be instruments for totalitarian control. And that's the challenge that we would like to address together with the US and all other democratic partners. The panel is about the resetting geopolitics. And I have been saying that we also need to think to think about logo politics, logo in the sense of discourse. Whoever controls the discourse today, public discourse has tremendous power. And we cannot leave that in the hands of actors. And I'm not talking about countries or specific countries or specific or specific companies, but actors that are not committed to freedom. So that's where I see this new connection that you want to build with the United States under the Biden administration. But also, as I said, that we want to build with all partners, preserving economic efficiency, preserving the need for sustainable development for the quick recovery. But without forgetting freedom. You know, Berga, I'm not a great fan of the concept of the great reset. And why is that? It's not we don't have anything against what's in it, but which is sustainable development, equality, everything. But the question of what's not there. And that's basically the concept of freedom and democracy. So that's the key frame, I think, of where we see the world today. We want economic efficiency, sustainable development inside a framework of freedom and democracy, and we have to work worldwide for for that goal. No, thank you so much, Minister, for also underlining this with freedom and liberty. One of the things that President Biden said in the election campaign was that he wanted as president to initiate a meeting in the sea and an alliance of democracies. Do you are you supportive of such approach and would Brazil also then join, I guess? And how do you see this dilemma then between such an alliance and also, for example, your cooperation with the BRICS, where you play a major role? Yes. Yes, we are in principle, we're in favor of the idea of an alliance of democracies. It seems that it's a project that has everything to do with what Brazil stands for today, as I said, and what we would like to achieve. So it's I think it should not be seen as something against specific actors, but for democracy, so an alliance of democracies for for democracy and in a way would have been already working in things that I think have to do with with that sort of of alliance. For example, in the WTO, Brazil stands strongly for a process of reform of the WTO that brings the WTO back to its original calling of working with the principles of the market economy, for example. Sometimes today you see in the world, if you play by the rules and if you open your economy like Brazil is opening, you're punished and if you keep subsidies and if you don't sometimes play by the rules, you are rewarded and we should we should avoid that and change that. We need an international system that rewards democracy, right? Not that it punishes anyone, but that rewards democracy, rewards countries that open up and that want to have I mean, freedom, fundamental freedoms, freedom of speech, everything and also economic freedom as well. So the idea of an alliance of democracies, I think it's great to conceive that not as an alliance against something, but an alliance for something, for this deeper concept of democracy. And as I told you, Brazil is coming from a situation where we were getting more and more away from the democratic world in previous administrations in Brazil, away from market economy. And there's strong, not only political, but popular and social sentiment that Brazil must become a force for freedom, for liberty, for the market economies as well. So we see ourselves as a player in that sort of alliance. We have also two other experts on trade here with us, with Arancha, but also François-Philippe. Arancha, how important do you think trade will be in the global recovery in the post-COVID world? How much of a change do you think it will be in all on the trade policies with the new Biden administration? Do you think it will be as much as you saw the first day when he re-entered the Paris Agreement or is that much more nuanced and where will WTO be in a year's time? Well, the first thing I would say is that trade will play an important role in the recovery, like it did in the recovery of the post-2009 crisis. And this is why it is important to continue to work for open markets, but also for fair trade rules. It's not enough to open. You also need to make sure that everybody is going to play by the rules. And we need to ensure that those rules are attuned to the realities of international trade today. One of the big game-changers in international trade has been the fast rise of digital trade. And we have seen this in a very marked manner during this last year. When we were confined in our homes, there were enormous restrictions to mobility, but online shopping skyrocketed. There's online shopping to a large extent to digital international trade. So what we need first is obviously to keep in mind that open markets will work better for their recovery, they work better for efficiency, for competitiveness, for innovation, and therefore for growth and jobs. But we have to do a lot of work on the side of updating the rules of international trade, especially in the space of digital trade. And this is where the World Trade Organization is such an important global institution. It's the place where we can most effectively update the rules of international trade. This is why I hope that the new US administration working together with many other WTO members, many are included in this panel, but there are many more out there, including China, come work to find the rules that will ensure fair rules of the game in this new digital space. And this will be tricky because there are lots of issues there from data to localization issues, to privacy issues, to safety and security, to cyber security, all of which is extremely sensitive, all of which is at the heart of a lot of the geopolitical games that we see on display in our world. So it will be difficult, but I think we could start, for example, in international trade by unblocking the leadership of the World Trade Organization. Make sure that at least the organization has a leader that can help in updating the rules of the game. And I really do hope that the new US administration, I hope that it does look at this leadership issue and get on with it. Thank you. I just wanted to come shortly back to this notion of two systems and decoupling. If you have one Chinese system and you have one US-led system, and how serious would that be for also future economic growth for the world? Is there a way of two big economists, the two largest in the world, competing at the same time, defining some common ground and then having some areas where they might decouple and have different systems? And how do the EU, as the largest market in the world, then deal with this? Can the EU end up like between a rock and a hard place, or how does the EU deal with this competition? Because I guess one of the few bipartisan things in DC these days are like the view on China. I think you're absolutely right, Borger, that the big geopolitical issue of our time is the rise of China, the competition that it poses to the US, and the spillover effects that it has on the rest of the world. And what I would say is that I see three things that we need to keep in mind, especially if you are the rest of the world, and certainly Spain, the European Union is the rest of the world for the purposes of this discussion. First, there are issues where decoupling just simply does not work. We cannot decouple climate change. So if we want to deal with climate change, we need to make sure we delineate the space for cooperation, including between China and the US and the rest of the world in this systemic issue called climate change. Otherwise, it just simply will not work. Then there is another space where we are going to see competition. And what we need to determine there is very clear rules of the game for this competition, whether it's an international trade, whether it's on technology, whether it's on investments. And there we need to be clear also that the rules have to be clear and the rules have to be fair. Otherwise, it just it's going to lead to a decoupling. And then there is a third consideration we need to keep in mind, which is avoid at all costs, open confrontation, because it's open confrontation will just simply ensure that destruction of every player, whether you are the US or China or the rest of the world. So these are for me the three considerations we need to keep in mind. There are areas where decoupling simply doesn't work. There are areas where we need rules of the game and above all, we need to avoid open confrontation. This is a very, very important observation. And also, I'm looking at you, Arancha is I guess, both even big countries like Brazil and Canada are the rest of the world in this context. So how do you look at it? Yes, so first of all, if you look a little bit back to the 90s, early 2000s, when China became a big partner in player and globalization and was brought into the multilateral trading system, the idea was that China would become more and more like the West, right? And this didn't happen, of course, but also from a certain point, what started to happen is that the West started to become more and more like China. And I think we shouldn't look at any of those futures. I mean, no one wants to change China anymore. But also, we should not change our models of society and our economies in certain ways that have been the case recently. So, but of course, we can have a common ground. And I think that has to do basically with the concept of the level playing field, which is basically through the WTO or other instruments to create the conditions where, I mean, you can compete independently from the social system where you are, right? So, and for that, we need so much dialogue and we need so much, maybe many new instruments in the areas of electronic commerce that Rancho was mentioning is so important, I mean, everywhere. So that's basically it. Thank you. François-Philippe between the rock and the hard place is not a very comfortable place to be, but I think you have a strategy for maneuvering that thing. Well, I think, first of all, I would say like the colleagues, I think all of our relationship when it comes to China is complex and multidimensional. I think it is true. Arancia said it, it's probably what is on the mind of colleagues around the world is how to deal with China or Nestos said a number of things. I like what, you know, in some sense, they're a place where we'll have perhaps to compete. And we all understand that there's other areas where I'll go in the same direction and colleagues that we have to cooperate. When you think about global health, climate change, definitely there will be space where we need to gather, but Ernesto said something I think which is fundamental for me is that we need to work together as the bold democracies to promote our model of governance, which is freedom, liberty and democracy. And I think we should not lose sight of that. You know, our model of governance during this pandemic has been challenged by authoritarian states, this information, we've seen a number of things. So we do need to put that squarely on the agenda. And to what Arancia was saying, I could not agree more when it comes to fairness. Let's be clear for all of us who listens to us that the rule base international order and rule base trade is what has provided stability, predictability and I would say prosperity for millions of peoples around the world. And certainly since the Second World War, where we establish these rules. And I think for us, countries like Spain or Brazil or Canada, a rule based trading system is essential where people abide by the rules. But also there's reciprocity. And I think that's where going back to what you were saying about the new administration in the U.S. that we can come up together and make sure that we have a system. You say, let's get the WTO back on track to make sure that it works and it serves the purpose. And it just reminds me more generally, we need to make sure that we have institutions which are fit for the 21st century. Many of us have talked about that. How do you retool them? Repurpose refinance to some extent to make sure that they will be there. Now we have a global pandemic, but we can all expect that there will be something else that will be coming. And we've seen no challenges too big for humanity. But as you have been fostering at Davos and all the colleagues, is that we can do that in my view to cooperation and science. Well, thank you so much for coming very close to the end there. But Aaronsha, global institutions fit for purpose. Are they fit for purpose? And second question, and you will have the chance now to wind up this, is Borel, the commissioner, Vice President, has said that the EU needs to be more assertive in the years to come. Also on this foreign and security policy. Do you agree with that? And what does it mean in practice? Over to Madrid. Thank you very much. Yeah, I fully agree with Borel's vision that the EU needs to be more assertive. We call it the EU needs to have a little bit more strategic autonomy, which for a country that is very inserted in the world, that is very globalized and that is an open economy and open society does not mean that Europe turns autarkic or it turns sovereign. But basically that this concept would mean to me that the EU is capable to respond to the challenges of our time working with allies and countries around the world when this is possible, but it's also ready to work on its own and to lead on its own when working with others is not possible. This is what a strategic autonomy means. And I have to say that we've learned during this pandemic, this concept has become a little bit more visible to us. And this is not just on the space of security and defense, but it's also on the area of international value chains where we need to build more resilience. It's also on the area of technology where we also in Europe need to have a bit more ability to regulate it in accordance with interests, but also in accordance with values that are important in Europe. So a bit more strategic autonomy, but countries around the world should not fear that this means the EU looks inward. But the EU becomes a little bit more self-assured and capable of acting on its own when this is the only option that is available. This in a nutshell would bargain be the concept of a strategic autonomy that opens strategic autonomy, that has become clearer to us in Europe over these last months of the pandemic. Thank you so much to Aaronsha. We go now to Ernesto and thank you or maybe Massey Bakour to you, François-Philippe. It's been a pleasure to have you.