tv German Marshall Fund Discussion on the Transatlantic Alliance CSPAN November 29, 2020 3:17am-4:30am EST
whether president trump has authority to exclude undocumented immigrants from its base. live coverage begins at 10:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. a discussion on the nato alliance and efforts to add ukraine and georgia as member countries. representatives of nato, ukraine, and georgia -- welcome our viewers on both side of the atlantic, actually. good morning. greetings from brussels. ukraineect of today,
and nato, is something i would say is part of the dna. we have been working for many years now on georgia related issues. supports fund that vaccines by addressing [indiscernible] in the region. want to thanklly the new europe center for all to support they provided contribute tonight. today, we want to dig into the subject of ukraine and georgia's relationship with nato, and especially how these countries fit [inaudible] reflects the process. this was announced by nato secretary-general jan native --g to see her to see how nato can prepare and
this process may lead to a new strategic concept, and this isn't a luxury. the current one dates back to 2007, if i'm not mistaken, so i would argue that there is a need to rethink nato strategy. the world nato operates in today has certainly changed in the last 10 years. i think, for instance, about the increased presence of china and the european security landscape. i think about the continued assertiveness of russia and key regions for transatlantic security, but also new challenges. hybrid warfare and cyber attacks. but the alliance needs to address these challenges. that also includes how nato engages with partners. it's crucial that countries like
ukraine or georgia are included in this 2030 reflection process, because increasingly, nato's adaptation is depending also on their relationship with partners. so, i think, in a nutshell, these are the issues that we want to discuss today. what to expect from the 2030 reflection process, why does this process matter, and what's the role of partners like ukraine or georgia? we are also privileged today because our experts on the panel will give us an exclusive preview of the reports that they wrote on this subject. so, let me actually introduce our panel of speakers today. first, the director of the new york center in kyiv. welcome to you. the cofounder of the georgian institute for strategic studies, and a member of the european parliament, but also actually a member of the group of experts, of the nato reflection process. thank you very much for taking the time to be with us.
we are also expecting olga to join us, the deputy prime minister for european affairs for transatlantic integration of ukraine. [inaudible] and we will obviously include her in this conversation. this conversation is on record. we will first turn to our speakers, but then also go to you, the audience, for q&a. we really want this to be an interactive debate, so feel free to please use the zoom chat function. i will be closely monitoring that and transferring your questions to our panelists. so, we have about 60 minutes left for this conversation and one of the officers of this report [inaudible] still on track.
and which priorities do you see emerging? >> good evening. good evening from kiev. first of all, let me thank brussels for the great partnership in organizing this event. for your interest in this event. i think the discussion is also indeed proper, because as we just before we went, the nato reflection group members, the secretary general of stoltenberg in order to present their ideas and their contributions to make -- nato reflections process for 2040. [indiscernible]
with regard to ukraine, we are pretty sure that in order to be envisioned, in order to be comprehensive, nato reflections process 2040 needs to take into account ukraine and georgia. this is why we stand, together with our georgian partners from the georgian institute, developed joint ukrainian-georgian expert accommodations through the modest contribution to the reflection process. these accommodations will and we are happy we can discuss them today, as well. we believe that both ukraine and georgia can fully resolve [indiscernible] for the 2040 reflection process.
formin the previous [indiscernible] as far as i remember, the previous document made reference to cooperation with russian federation. so, i think that it is of fundamental importance that nato's new strategic documents that reflect all materiality's as a new challenger to atlantic security. [indiscernible] and the changing dynamics. let's not forget that when we are talking about ukraine and
georgia, we are talking about countries who have a double meaning, or are playing double role. as partners, and as countries that are aspiring to become nato members. let me elaborate on that a little bit. firstly, what do ukraine and georgia proved to be one of the most reliable nato partners? what countries [indiscernible] unity partners? the gop program, the demonstration of the two country's contributions to their operations and mission, as well ofa high level [indiscernible] and those member states [indiscernible] both countries have proven they can be not only consumers, but also contributed to europe's taking anecurity by
effective part in the alliance contribution and operations. ukraine, for example, is the only partner to correctly contributed to all nato-led operations. secondly, ukraine and georgia are two of the three countries that are currently not made no members. membership in nato [indiscernible] in ukraine, it's a conscious and responsible choice of our country, ukraine and georgia. for ukraine, integration in nato foreign policy and security priorities. we should support a level of and importantly, a level society.
result of russian aggression, by the way. i would like to underline here this is probably the first time in ukraine's history that there was a change of president and government, and the parliament last year. the call of major integration last year has not been challenged for a while. when we're talking about the nato membership, we are not suggesting something brand-new or extraordinary. as you know, ukraine and georgia will become nato members. the membership action plan [indiscernible] which we can see, ukraine and georgia as our next logical step in the european integration. this is mentioned as the next step for ukraine and georgia on
their path to membership. as a result, we expect with the application of this policy, would not be selective. georgia and ukraine actually should be a roadmap to the membership, and amongst other should be a roadmap to the membership, and amongst other things, i think it's important to mention that this policy will encourage georgia and ukraine to improve their democratic practices and advance their agenda, because nato's policy remains in up report and -- and drive up ukrainian and georgian policymakers. actually, foreign iliticians [indiscernible]
mean our country's institutions, both locally and militarily. and not only in france and georgia, but also nato's interest to support the interests of the countries. by doing so, nato will expand the community of like-minded, stable, and predictable democracy. so, i think it's in nato's interest, as well. probablyindiscernible] -- properly recognize it as an important part to the security of the region. [indiscernible] our strategic location might put both ukraine and georgia at the
last but not least, in our view, [inaudible] georgia and ukrainian can be successful in identifying the threats faced by the life. low intensity conflict, in which russia has initiated, because we should remember that russia, at should remember that russia, at it's a convenient place toone undermine international law, which involve smuggling, which involve [indiscernible] i think i will stop here and turn now more to our recommendations.
>> thank you very much. this was a very good kick off, i would say. i appreciate you going over ukraine's role, not only as a consumer, but as a security provider. i think that's a pretty important point. going back to the georgian point of view, i'm making a plea to better consider the role of companies like georgia and ukraine in the nato 2040 process. so, what would be your recommendation from a georgian perspective? thank you very much. >> first of all, thanks a lot to the organizers and to our partners for producing this report. it's great, because i actually do see a huge value in hearing their voices because if you can look at how the realities on the ground, but also the dynamics are changing, i think that the value of the partners will be increasing in the years to come. because the collective defense, as such, we are going to have to
have a holistic view about the collective defense. the companies that have been in close cooperation and partnership nowadays and if seeing the natural resolution of this partnership for 30 years and have been reliable partners throughout this time, in a neighborhood which actually sees a sea of authoritarians, very much unpredictable environment has been stably democratic, i would say, maybe not consolidated, of course, but we're still trying to keep ourselves on the track of being democratic. and that, i think, is extremely important. as mentioned, we've been contributing to international security. we are small. i mean georgia is small, ukraine is bigger than us. but we were trying to punch above our weight, because in spite of having these terrible problems of our own, i think that georgia and ukraine have made a very serious case about being the contributor, but also
credible partners throughout this time. and i think i want to take a bigger picture view right now of why i think it's a window of opportunity for both sides, for nato and for georgia and ukraine. the region has seen a very dramatic change of the dynamics in the recent weeks, i would say, for about a month and a half, and we've had a very different status quo right now. many see this not only as a perception level right now, but also on a practical level, as a weakness of the west in the way, seeing it as pushed out or cut out of a region, which it actually, conditionally has been always present in. but nowadays, the status quo actually says something else, and considering that, and considering that georgia and ukraine remain to be profoundly pro-western for quite some time, i think that, for nato and for
the ones coming up should think about what's going to be the value of these countries in different dimensions. and i will try to explain what are these dimensions. i will talk about the dimensions, the military ones, but also a value-based dimension which i think is going to have to be something we have to be thinking about, which -- provided there is going to be a rethinking in washington, probably, after the new administration comes in. some of the appointments that are going to be made already are pretty interesting in a way, because i think there is going to be a new thinking for the region, as well. with that in mind, i would like to make two cases now. this is also part of our report, but i think young democracies like georgia and ukraine definitely deserve to have a better understanding and to have better, i would say, traction, because they are the ones who have proven to continue the democratic trend in the region. others are looking up at us.
let it be belarus, many of the people are thinking everything is deadlocked in our region, as well. but then there was a very interesting development in armenia. everyone was thinking that that was not going to be happening, but it's happening because they heed a successful -- of being present in the vicinity, in the region.
present in the vicinity, in the region. so, if you have young democracies like georgia or ukraine, and you give them a chance, an open door policy -- i'd like to agree that the selectivity of the open-door policy definitely shouldn't be the case, because while we're building this case, there is a very clear political message. we do have a clear political message for quite some time, but those messages should be sent out my more practical means. frankly speaking, you know, no one in the region has a problem with the practical side of our cooperation with nato. we're enhanced opportunities partners. we have very good initiatives, and these will continue for quite some time. when it comes to political sides, we're still understanding the depths that are behind. for nato, actually, as you rightly mentioned, it also gives relevance to nato, because nato has to find itself to be relevant. and i think that it's much more than just military consideration, but it also gives them the power of the -- they can have. i think that's a very important element. when it comes to strategic considerations, both georgia and ukraine, making some things aren't indispensable to nato's
eastern plan. i think they're extremely important. why? because we are transit routes. we are infrastructure hubs, one way or another, and we have been trying to get away from the russian cloud to be independent and to have a free hand. let it be the energy carriers, let it be all kinds of cargo, land, b maritime, or let it be air. i think that is extremely important. because in the years to come, we will see that other players will be answering the region. right now, it has been more cautious for some of them, but definitely china
definitely china is having plans to get more fdr i. they're thinking about various projects. we can talk about that, as well. there's going to be a turkey connection, which is a member of nato, but with increasingly independent policy. that's a new factor, which i think that all of us have to be thinking about. georgia is a partner and is an ally of turkey, and has been continuing for quite some time. and then, of course, we have russia. and russia always has so-called quotation marks, a special understanding of where they are and why they are in the region. considering the inclusion of georgia and ukraine, and then a new wave of political extension will be extremely important. and of course, there is a greater value to nato, as well, because nato has space in the black sea. everyone recognizes them, that that inhey recognize the summits. that the eastern flank needs to be reinforced. everyone understands that. excellent.
let me just ask you to round up here, because we want other speakers to intervene. just two more minutes, one minute? >> 30 seconds. ok, 30 seconds. georgia and ukraine are indispensable when it comes to the plan southeast of the alliance. i think that's extremely important. and there are different ways, and i can talk later about initiatives, which can be coming up. sorry for being late. >> let's get back to some of your points. we want to an interactive debate, so let's have time for everyone to intervene. debate, so let's have time for everyone to intervene. thank you very much for joining us and you presented some of
i would love to hear your insights there, but also perhaps let me give you this question, if i may. almost 10 years ago, nato also had a group of experts which was then chaired by madeleine albright, and their job was to advise on nato 2020. i remember the big debate back then was whether nato should be an alliance that should be engaged globally or if it was only to focus on article five territory. do you think the debate today is different? because if nato is to strengthen its partnership, it needs to be outward looking. >> i'm sorry, your question, this will be a very quick answer. the debate goes on, surely, but
you an explanation. yes, today we were able to finally submit the report to nato secretary-general. unfortunately, for our today's meeting, we are still obliged to keep silent until obliged by nato foreign ministers to keep silence until their debate, which is to happen on december 1. and then our report is to become public. so, please maintain some patience. yet i think that i'm so much intertwined in affairs of
georgia and ukraine and particular links to both countries to nato, which might be interesting to all of you. i still remember my visit to ukraine. it was august of 2006. and standing together with then-foreign minister in front of a panel of journalists, we were debating ukraine's eventual exception to international organizations like eu, and there were some remarks about nato amongst journalists, as well. and i would say the spirit about nato was rather -- not ambivalent. it was rather negative. everyone was afraid of speaking
openly about nato, although i know that the will was already there at that time. surely, last six years, and ukraine fighting for territorial integrity made a change within public perception. also, engagement of ukraine in many -- in between, ukraine signed a framework agreement with e.u., as well. in my previous capacity as chairwoman on security and defense, i met both ukraine and georgian soldiers in many nations all over the world. so truly, i can prove with my own eyes that both countries are
really providers of security for all eu member states and nato allies. that is true. that is true. so, both countries are extremely important. same with georgia. i still remember talking to numerous representatives of nato allies who used to confirm that most predominantly georgian population is most prominently the most pro-nato in the world. now, within nato, we tend to complain about public support, necessity to extend public diplomacy programs to ensure, to
convince her -- convince our respective populations of the value and benefits and contributions of nato to world security. while in georgia, it is evident the major part of society thinks like this. actually, it is now very positive in both countries. i still remember another event. bucharest nato summit, i was, at that time, had of the late presidents chancellor, and consultnt by him to with some allies. in particular, those who were reluctant about both countries
[indiscernible] at that time. i participated in bucharest, of course, as well, so i remember debates and all engagements. justlly, i have everything before my eyes, those chambers and those discussions at that time. yes, it was a promise in bucharest, and i think it is still both countries will become nato members. later on, i remember responses of others during the nato parliamentary assembly.
i think it was one person that replied very clearly that yes, this promise ends. i think we have to repeat this. they witnessed all those things. i hope that the developments of nato, because open-door policy is still valid, acknowledged by all of us, we're able to, despite tensions, sometimes difficult to end tensions and a very difficult debate. we remain united. and that's a contemporary message, i think, about nato. we are allies. we want to stay like this.
and surely, georgia and ukraine are, in my private opinion, which i'm entitled to say now, are very important factors to keep this position of nato. thank you. >> thank you very much for your encouraging words. i'm sorry. it's just important that personalities like yours express these opinions. it's most useful. let me turn to our last, but not least, gaia guideah. so we were informed that they help an important meeting, but you were the senior advisor to the prime minister, so you are deeply involved in the policymaking and agenda setting, so thanks for joining us. i just wanted to, perhaps, poke your brain with a small question here. so, we've just been hearing from
all our speakers that look, ukraine and georgia, we are security providers, as well, and nato and the alliance all benefit from our potential membership. my question to you is that membership is not that easy to -- it's not based on quantitative measurements. it's also a political decision. how, from your perspective, do we deal with this need for political, brave decision? >> thank you. thank you all. and first of all, let me express our apologies for not having today, deputy prime minister. she was really looking forward to this event. but unfortunately, due to someone unforeseen situation, she had to be at one very important meeting.
we are very sorry for this, but we are very sorry for this, but i am very grateful to all of all members, and to the center for organizing this event, and especially we're grateful to experts who provide their opinion and recommendations and very solid analysis of ukraine and georgia's contribution to atlantic security and their role in euro atlantic security architecture. so, it's very important for us, for the government, and i hope that nato and the reflection group also will take into account their recommendations. i know that the ukrainian center of defense submitted their recommendations of ukraine immunity. so we're lucky to have such strong involvement of experts in
this process. as for your question, yesterday we had a very good discussion, also organized by the center, and we talked about nato, about enhanced opportunity programs, and how ukraine can take full advantage of this program. and one of them, our foreign partners, say that we should talk not only about military availability, but also about political ones. so, to make our society close, to make ukraine politically the same as the nato members. so, it's -- and i think when we will have this, like, common understanding, then ukraine also underwent this important
political reforms that ukraine achieved the rule of law. then there will be no question -- no station around the question of membership. so, it's a matter of time, and now we should work on our very often dull home task. and i would like to make a few points, if i may, about like ukraine vision from the government, about what's the future, are all in your atlantic security. >> sure, of course. >> es. -- yes. we are on the same page with the experts, so our region is very close to those presented by experts.
but i would like to express a few points. first of all, ukraine's participation in that reflection process is a good example of support and solidarity with ukraine. and it also shows that ukraine is important from development in the next 10 years. we should always keep this in mind. ukraine is a part of european security, and so it's logical that ukraine would take back in this process. and we very appreciate the alliance for their trust and confidence in us. we expect that nato has a strong commitment to open-door policy and [indiscernible] i'm sorry.
can we take a short break because i think the deputy prime minister will join us? >> absolutely. in fact, while you're securing the participation of the deputy prime minister, we will get to some questions. we actually have some comments here on what we said. let me perhaps take some of the observations of our viewers. some viewers are actually referring also to the role that russia plays in this whole equation. we have a comment here, a retired u.s. ambassador, who says that president george bush, back then, pledged that nato won't come to the russian border, and is there any indication that this policy has changed? that's one question we got. but we also have viewers who say
that perhaps we went to fast -- too fast, the european union and nato with our integration to the east and not understanding moscow sevens -- moscow sensitivity. these are two comments we received. i just want to ask our panel's opinion on this. obviously, nato has relationships with ukraine and georgia -- should we consider those, what russia means for this? you first. >> thank you. just a brief comment on the question of gorbachev. it's a very popular myth. actually, gorbachev himself said in 2014, i believe, that there is an old pledge from nato member states, americans and
british. i think there is nothing to discuss here actually. and as far as i remember, what the germans, americans, and agreed to back in 1990 was that there would be no non-german nato forces in the territory of the former gdr. was a formal agreement or something like that. there was no pledge. i think it's important to remember that, because i know that this narrative is very popular, is insanely popular. >> ic the ambassador is reacting, saying that gorbachev himself denies that also. >> yeah, that's what i said. it was in 2014. i think he was interviewed by german media -- i don't
remember. some of the western media, and he said there was no such and such. and on russia, yes, you know, our position is clear. russia should not have that right on our integration to nato. and, you know, some concerns, there are some concerns among some nato member states, they don't want to make any moves that could, like, provoke russia or something like that. and we've had similar discussions. for example, during last couple of years, when ukraine applied for eop, and they were also concerned and found the member states were quite reluctant to
and georgia, especially for georgia, because our position here and my position -- i know that many ukrainians share this osition, that georgia, you now [naudable] they made a lot of progress, a lot of progress in terms of adopting standards for their military institutions. yes, russia should ot -- from that. >> i appreciate that you stressed the fact that those concerns that russia would be educated are not concerns at all. nothing happens. let me get back to you, actually. for you member states that are
concerned, from your experience in georgia, how do we deal with those member states who have concerns with no grounds, pparently? >> well, just to continue with the question that was posed before, first and foremost, nato is a contested alliance. those sensitivities, i don't see that being a legitimate, because they don't see that the outcomes will be beneficial for all, because they have their own worldview and they want everyone else to comply with that. the third-party veto, i think that is extremely important. if that principle stands, i think we are going to be undermining many important pillars of why nato is this and why the states are attracted to is. the deputy prime minister just joined from the car, and she has quite a limited amount of time, so deputy prime minister, thanks
for joining us. please enjoy your car ride. it is really wonderful you are with us for this amount of time. we have a very simple question for you, deputy prime minister. his ukraine's nato integration on track, and what are the priorities for your country on this track? thank you so much. i am so sorry that i did not manage to join earlier, but we had a discussion with the president on eop and other staff, so i decided that i would be late, but i would still deliver the result when we are
speaking. this question is the easy one, because things are very well on track. the eop statutes within nato, we made the analysis and prepare the roadmap of our participation in this event and we are about to sign it, but also we are very much into high-level political dialogue with the capital, and we think as ukrainian military forces are developing and new strategies are adopted and outstanding legislation is standing for adoption, we are ready to talk about broader context and first of all, we are talking about the role of ukraine generally as the country of the -- region, and we think we should not have to discuss the issue of membership of nato. it is the reflection process, and this is not only about the membership, the new administration will show them to he global arena and --
-- it is top priority from the president and we i am the deputy prime minister in charge of the integration. we are coordinating all the issues and are here to speed the processes up, and i think it is happening. deputy prime minister, thank you very much for those remarks. your connection is slightly unstable, so i think we will have you enjoy your car ride for now. we are grateful you took the time to join for those remarks, and i think your message was indeed very well received. thanks very much, and we wish you a very pleasant evening. ms. fotega, let me get back to you, perhaps. the deputy prime minister said ukraine is on track, we are modernizing, we've got eop, and e have heard all these
chievements have not triggered the reaction from russia. how do we now go further from eop to matt to member? what should be the plan ere? >> i think that the most important is the political will and understanding he importance of those countries, georgia and ukraine, as our partners. in particular with the quite complicated international nvironment, i think that while we acknowledge both countries being on track, it is also an incentive for both governments and respective societies to
continue -- and to overcome tensions, to have broad support, to trying to overcome divisions. the current reflection process is dedicated to today's experts of enhancing political roles of nato. i think those issues also have to be taken into account. i think that both eu and nato, i say this because we maintain the process of cooperation between both organizations and to both
organizations, but georgia and ukraine are extremely important. they are associated countries with strong voices to make special efforts to make them even closer. in particular, it is quite loud in my region, central and eastern europe. i share the view that was presented, that we have geopolitical, i would say, changes in the broad picture as well, and we have to take this
into account and bring countries that are the most stable in our neighborhood, not young historically, but in terms of reforms. we want to have them closer. russia, yes, that is true. absolutely. we tend to say the third countries should not have the veto right. both eu and nato extended to russia numerous times. actually, it was russia's choice to pursue a rather aggressive policy. we have to simply take this into account, maintaining, of course, a channel of communication with the kremlin as well. thank you. >> thank you, ms. fotega. let me get back to you --
apologies to cut you short a few moments ago. ms. fotega mentions olitical will to move forward. they were asking, what can georgia and ukraine do to persuade western politicians that we need to ratify and e.u. membership? how do we change the views, according to your opinion? >> first of all, i think we have to continue being reliable. that's extremely important and i will explain what i mean by being reliable. we have to be a reliable democracy. i think the value of being trustworthy, the value of being a young democracy which continues to be successful, that is a practical dimension, those physical dimensions are important, because we have to how we are a functional state.
we have to be able to graduate from any dysfunctionality that is associated with this part of the region. that will continue. i'm pretty sure that when the time comes, if we continue to, on that track, there was going to be a window of opportunity. it might be a bigger change of the picture we have been talking about or it might be a different experience. i think the governments here in georgia and also in kiev have to understand -- [no audio] hello? continue to knock on the door. do you hear me?
>> we hear you again. thank you very much. >> ok, sorry. we also have to continue to be knocking on the door. it is extremely important to continue to knock on the door, to express the will which is uninterrupted. that we want to be nato members. we have to continue to be part of the international conversations and contributing to any missions which we think that our participation will add value to. i think there is also a significant importance to the politicians. then we have to be explaining to the major capitals what we mean by our value, and how that is going to be coming forward. i am pretty sure there was skepticism with any type of enlargement we have been seeing. with e.u.. naito.
i have talked to a lot of people in the baltic countries, and they were telling me stories, no one even wanted to hear their argument in the beginning. it was a nonstarter in the beginning. if we continue the evolution, if we continue doing our job of being a reform minded and continue with our democracy there will be a time where there is simply not going to be a lot of opportunities to refuse to come up with no answers. there are also considerations that i am talking about when it comes to the changes. i think the value will be seen in where we are and how we have behaved so far. >> thank you. let me get back to you for a second. we have a question which i would like to address by a fellow in
italy. she is asking whether you see future cooperation between nato and the eu european partnership initiatives in the areas we are discussing today. she is also arguing that reforms undertaken in ukraine and other countries may be regressing and whether this regression of reforms will impact any possibility for nato membership? >> uhhhhh. on the reforms i think sometimes -- on some direction -- do not forget that ukraine probably is the country in the orld now which is implementing
reforms and to which has improved its democracy. while waging a war. the only war in europe which is the russian war against ukraine. t is still like a war. that is why we are even in terms of reform, we have a lot of -- politicians -- pro-russian oliticians, political forces are supported by russia and they
are promoting the russian narrative in ukraine and i would uggest that -- ecause some of the processes and some of the signs show up, but you know that -- warfare against ukraine. we also witnessed elements of warfare against ukraine. some elements of warfare. what i would like to say is the picture is quite complicated. it is not black and white. there are some improvements and
some practices -- the situation is really complicated and still ukraine is moving forward and that is why it is very important to have this light at the end of the tunnel. to see that this membership perspective -- the politicians and opinion leaders. >> thank you very much. unfortunately we are nearing the end of this event. perhaps i would like to turn our final comments to the deputy prime minister who has rejoined us for aybe final comments. before we close, you are now
part of the nato reflection process as well. do you see any opportunities for eu nato cooperation to strengthen the resilience of countries like georgia and ukraine? >> i think that both countries -- both organizations are very much focused on cooperation with the georgia and ukraine and they have very strong report -- there is very strong support for both countries. i just wanted very briefly to comment on earlier and a question or remark about reforms in both countries. e have to remember how difficult it was to implement reforms.
in my region, after changes in -- nd in 18989 and other and other countries slightly later, just a few months. just a few months later in peaceful times. things happened to westernize -- western eu member states after prices in 2008. now try to imagine implementing ery harsh and very challenging reforms and at the same time defending territorial integrity. in the case of ukraine, very open conflict. we have to remember about authorization in georgia as well.
the absorption of georgia's territory goes on a daily basis. we have to take this into account. it is difficult to maintain ublic support. it is our role to stand by them and support them. i can imagine cooperation, i see the will to cooperate both within the eu and nato on those issues. thank you. >> thank you very much for those final words. thank you for rejoining us. the whole event has been confirming that georgia and ukraine can be security
providers as well as security -- even though some member states may still need some convincing that membership is a good thing for the alliance as a whole. we have viewers on this event covering all of europe and northern america, what would the final message to our viewers be regarding today's topic? >> thank you. at least a couple more remarks bout the division of ukraine from the perspective of contributors to global security. i think that this is the core of the positive agenda that ukraine is bringing towards europe tlantic integration. basically it was a very important question in regards to reform. you are asking whether things are well on track.
let's recollect our memory the year of 2019 when the president and the parliament were reelected. they expected a fresh agenda, but still now -- expecting for ukrainian politicians to smile unanimously and say things are going on track then nothing happens. the reality is totally different. of course there is a huge informational space and many things are happening at the same time. you may not always see the huge reforms and transformations taking place. the banking reform, the president has adopted the nato security strategy -- it is core and core principle of
the strategy. on the defense procurement about to adopt the law on the reform of security service. these are the things that went unnoticed basically in our country. this is something positive that is not very good and nice for the news. i am grateful that partners see t. this progress allows us to bring to the political level of the capital another quality of discussion. i am really grateful that they confirmed that there is a need to have the dialect. the progress we show and the commitment we show and the personal commitment of the president -- it is confirmed his personal changes in formal exchanges with the secretary-general as regards to eop and other things. this enables us to think more strategically. ukraine sees that we can
contribute not only with the issues and building a stronger resilience to have ally bus we can be a contributor to the whole black sea region in terms of the security. i think this is something that's letting in terms of the broader genda that is lacking. we are putting a lot of effort into the new u.s. administration to be fully formed by january of 2021. i think that the global role the u.s. is about the play in the national arena will bring more ukrainians to the agenda and bring more inspiration to consider ukraine as the leader and contribute to the security transformation of the region. just to finish, i'm really happy that those partners who support
ukraine see the progress and transformations. just to name the issues. do you see me? > we do see you. >> i am really happy that we are having this discussion right in the middle of the nato reflection process which hopefully will show us how our allies see the materialization of the open-door policy. ooking forward to that end -- and working hard from that. thank you for this discussion and greetings to our georgian colleagues, we have so much to discuss on a daily basis. >> thank you very much for your final words and a touch of ptimism. on this note, this is the end of our event. i regret for our viewers that there is no more time for
questions, but i do congratulate all of you phenomenon issues that you did raise. i had a lot of fun discussing this issue. there is definitely more need for debate around this topic. we will definitely do that. it's not the last event we will organize around this issue. let me also thank again our partners here, we were -- we are very grateful for your support. thank you for joining us. i wish to thank my own team, they have been very instrumental in bringing us together. i do wish everyone a very good evening or a very good afternoon. thank you and i will see you next time. >> here is our live coverage of
c-span monday. two supreme court oral argument. first trump vs. new york whether the president has the authority to prevent noncitizens from census.unted in the the house begins the week with a pro forma session with no votes scheduled and then they take up a measure on legalizing marijuana. on c-span 2, a forum on u.s. efforts to combat isis in syria and iraq. the secretary of state certification of the 2020 esults in arizona. monday night on the communicators, netflix founder and c.e.o. reed hastings and aaron mier discuss the unorthodox workplace culture behind one of the largest tech
places if the world. netflix and the culture of reinvention. >> you have to do what you think is right to help the customers and company. you can't be trying to please your box, me. you're not allowed to let me drive the bus off the cliff. you have to fight for the benefit of the company and in general we say don't seek to please your boss. seek to please the customers and to grow the company. so we want people to actively think independently. not just to implement their boss' wishes. >> watch the communicators monday night at 8:00 eastern on c-span 2. >> next, look at what u.s. foreign policy will look like an abiding administration. this brookings panel talked about afghanistan peace talks, america's role in the middle east and the impact of the troop withdrawal ordered by president trump.