Ukrainians formerly imprisoned by Russia testified at the United Nations this week about the torture they were subjected to in captivity. Ukrainian journalist and activist Maxym Butkevych, who spent more than two years in a Russian prison in an occupied Ukrainian town, described how he was deprived of fresh air and sunlight, subjected to beatings and electric shocks, denied medical assistance and forced to appear in recorded videos under duress.

Click here for the full story in Russian.
…

While U.S. President Joe Biden views his response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine as a cornerstone of his foreign policy legacy, critics argue he missed a historic opportunity to help Ukraine win the war. 

Michael Carpenter, director for Europe at the National Security Council, spoke with VOA, defending the administration’s policies on Ukraine, stating they were undeterred by Russia’s nuclear threats, and attributing Ukraine’s lack of success in regaining lost territories to manpower shortages. 

The following interview has been edited for brevity and clarity.  

VOA: Is President Biden leaving Ukraine in the strongest position possible?  

Michael Carpenter, Senior Director for Europe at the National Security Council: He is. Look, the United States has given Ukraine every capability militarily that they have asked for. We have secured through painstaking diplomacy with our G7 partners a $50 billion loan. We have lifted all restrictions on rules of engagement for our military systems, for our weapons that we have provided to Ukraine. And we have worked with the Ukrainian military and the Ukrainian leadership to devise a strategy for them to be able to defend themselves and ideally negotiate from a position of strength where they can achieve their aims to maintain a sovereign, independent, democratic Ukraine. That’s always been our goal and it remains our goal. I fail to mention the sanctions and the costs that we have levied on the Russian Federation. Unprecedented sanctions in the energy sector and in the financial sector over the course of the last three months. So were handing things off, I think, on very good terms.  

VOA: Does it mean that Ukraine, in your view, is ready to enter any possible negotiations with Russia next year from the position of strength?  

Carpenter: Well, look, I think it’s very important that Ukraine’s leaders, that President Zelensky in particular, decide when he wants to negotiate with the Russians. And what I will say is, at this point in time, I do not assess the President Putin wants to enter into a negotiation on good faith on anything other than the terms for the capitulation of Ukraine. So Ukraine has to decide when it feels that it is empowered to enter into this negotiation. And it’ll be up to the next administration to hold the Russians’ feet to the fire and ensure that they have the appropriate leverage to ensure that this is not a sellout of Ukraine’s sovereignty, but that this is a negotiation that leads to a just, durable, lasting peace, that preserves Ukraine as a sovereign, democratic, independent state. 

VOA: But is Ukraine in the strongest possible position for that? Because that was one of the goals.  

Carpenter: It is, under the circumstances. Look, war is messy. War involves all kinds of suffering. And Ukraine has certainly suffered over the course of the more than 1000 days of Russia’s brutal aggression against it. At the end of the day, Russia has occupied parts of Ukraine that I wish had not come to pass. But there are also realities in this war. And one of those realities has to do with manpower on the two sides of the front lines of this battle space. And Ukraine simply has fewer people on the battle space than Russia is able to muster. And that has resulted in the situation that we’re in today. I think Ukraine is in a strong position. I think it’s in a strong position financially. I think the capabilities that we have given, the investments we’ve made in things like Ukrainian production of unmanned aerial vehicles, in terms of the capabilities, the armored vehicles that we’ve provided, the HIMARS systems that have been highly effective, the air defense systems, including the Patriot, all of that has been, I think, incredibly useful for Ukraine. Of course, the situation remains tenuous in certain parts of the Donbass, and that is simply a reality of this war.  

VOA: You said that the Biden administration achieved its goals towards Ukraine, but wasn’t, at some point, the goal a victory of Ukraine? 

 

Carpenter: Ideally, Ukraine would have been able to liberate its territory. I think there’s still hope that Ukraine can continue to work towards not just defense but also liberating some of its land. But at the end of the day, this boils down to what I said earlier. This is a fundamentally a physics and a math problem in terms of the number of people on both sides of the front lines. And Russia is able to bring more soldiers to bear in this war than Ukraine has been able to. And we can give all the capabilities: from F-16s to Abrams tanks to HIMARS systems, ATACMS missiles, you name it. But without the manpower on the front lines, it’s impossible to achieve what you have just outlined, which is complete liberation of all of Ukraine’s territory. And so, look, it’s up to Ukrainians again to decide when and under what circumstances they want to negotiate. But we have set them up for success, given the capabilities that we have provided, which I just want to remind your viewers, is close to $70 billion in security assistance. That is a significant amount of capability that the United States has provided.  

 

VOA: You mentioned the assistance. In December, you assured us that the United States and the Biden administration will use all of that approved funds to provide Ukraine military assistance. But now there is $3.8 billion that this administration is leaving for the next. Why didn’t the Biden administration use those funds? And do you have any concern that the next administration might not want to use these funds to support Ukraine?  

Carpenter: Well, you know, I don’t want to get into a complex discussion of the way our budgetary process works, but there is a difference between authorized funds and obligated funds. So we have provided all of the funds that Congress has obligated for Ukraine. That’s not all the funds that have been authorized. But it takes coordination between the administration and Congress to be able to move all of that money. We have moved all of it that we had available to us. Yes, the next administration will now have the option to use some of that authorized money to continue to provide assistance to Ukraine. And some of what we have obligated is on contract, or is en route, and will arrive in the coming weeks. But all of that is available to the next administration to continue to support Ukraine.

VOA: Before leaving office, Biden’s administration, as you said, imposed major energy sanctions against Russia. Do you think that these measures might be something that pushes Russia economy closer to a collapse and something that can actually stop Russia’s war machine? 

Carpenter: Well, our hope is that this additional pressure, which is extraordinary because we have imposed full blocking sanctions on two of the largest Russian oil companies. Surgutneftegas and Gazprom Neft, together with over 180 vessels from Russia’s shadow fleet. We hope that additional cost in position will bring Putin closer to a realistic and durable solution to this conflict when he sits down at the negotiating table eventually, whenever that happens. I think, of course, any type of sanctions that reduce the revenues available to the Russian Federation is less money in the hands of those who fuel Russia’s war machine and Russia’s aggression against Ukraine. And it provides more space for Ukraine to be able to negotiate from a position of strength.  

VOA: In his foreign policy speech yesterday, President Biden mentioned as one of his accomplishments that he was able to prevent a direct confrontation between two nuclear powers, the United States and Russia. Many analysts that we’re talking to say that fears of nuclear escalation prevented President Biden from helping Ukraine win the war. Why was the United States deterred by Russia’s “red lines,” but not vice versa? 

Carpenter: Nobody was deterred. The United States provided every capability that Ukraine asked for. It is only logical that as the world’s largest nuclear superpower, that the United States has to factor in escalation management. 

Anyone who says to the contrary is being irresponsible about foreign policy and does not sit in the Oval Office and have to make those weighty decisions.  

VOA: But does it send a signal that Russia’s “nuclear card” will always beat everything else?  

Carpenter: No, it does not, because the Ukrainians have done extraordinarily well at certain points on the battlefield. But this fundamentally gets back to what the question you raised earlier, which is manpower. And that’s not a variable that the United States controls. 

VOA: How do you hope the next administration approaches the policy towards Ukraine? And how does President Biden feel about the fact that his legacy towards Ukraine will be largely defined by the policies of the next administration? 

Carpenter: I’m not going to speak to what the next administration will do or won’t do. I will just say that, again, this administration, we have tried to hand off a situation where Russia is both on its back foot, thanks to our sanctions in the energy and financial spheres; [and] Ukraine is in a solid macro financial state thanks to the $50 billion loan that we negotiated together with our G-7 partners, and that Ukraine has the capabilities militarily to be able to continue to maintain the defense of its territory.  
…

GENEVA — More than 3,000 global leaders from upwards of 130 countries will make their annual pilgrimage next week to the World Economic Forum, meeting in the plush Swiss Alpine resort of Davos.

Nearly 5,000 Swiss army personnel will be on hand to ensure security for thousands of the world’s top movers and shakers in government, business, technology, civil society, the humanities and art.

They will convene between Jan. 20 and 24 to discuss and seek solutions for some of the most pressing issues of the day.

Among the decision-makers expected to attend will be President-elect Donald Trump, who will be president of the United States when he makes a virtual appearance later next week at the yearly event.

“The same week as we are opening our annual meeting next week, there also will be an inauguration happening in the largest economy in the world, the United States,” Borge Brende, president and CEO of the WEF, told journalists at a news conference Tuesday.

“So, we are pleased that also the key leaders from the largest economies in the world — the United States, China, and European Union — will be with us in Davos,” he said, noting that Trump “has joined us physically in Davos before as president” during his first term.

“He will on Thursday afternoon join us digitally, online live in the dialogue with our participants,” he said. “We think that will be a very special moment also to learn more what the new administration’s policy priorities are.”

Since the U.S. is likely to have confirmed a number of Trump’s picks for his Cabinet, he said that toward the end of the week, “we do expect even additional high-level representation from the Trump administration.”

“So, we are very pleased by that because we know that there is a lot of interest among our participants and the rest of the world to decipher and understand the policies of the new administration,” Brende said. “So, it will be a very interesting week.”

Asked whether multibillionaire Elon Musk might be among those attending the forum, he replied, “We don’t know. He is, of course, also welcome with Donald Trump when he, hopefully, comes physically also at our next annual meeting.”

Brende noted that this year’s forum is taking place at a time of greater global uncertainty than has been seen in a generation. He asserted that geopolitical tensions, economic fragmentation and accelerating climate change demonstrate the critical need for dialogue.

“Within this more unsettled climate, the only way to address urgent challenges and unlock new opportunities is through innovative, cooperative approaches,” he said.

Key topics on next week’s forum agenda include the conflicts raging in the Middle East. Special panels will explore the “terrible humanitarian situation in Gaza,” the future governance and rebuilding of Syria, and concerns about the potential escalation of conflicts in the region, particularly between Israel and Iran.

“I don’t think we are out of the woods yet,” said Brende, noting that a strong Israeli delegation and Iran’s vice president, Mohammad Javar Zarif, will be in Davos. “So, it should be possible for dialogue, and hopefully we can also find a path forward for peace and reconciliation, and address humanitarian sufferings.”

He said the “forgotten conflict in Sudan that, unfortunately, is also turning into a proxy war” will be debated, as will Myanmar and other areas of instability.

“We know that the war in Ukraine is, unfortunately, continuing with huge humanitarian consequences,” he said, noting that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy will give a special address at the forum.

The overall theme of the annual meeting is “Collaboration in the intelligent age.” Linked to this is the rapid technological advancements that hold both benefits and risks for society.

“AI, or artificial intelligence, and generative artificial intelligence, or Gen AI, obviously, is front and center of our agenda. It is this super technology, if you will, that interacts with a lot of the other technologies,” said Mirek Dusek, managing director of the WEF.

“Among the host of technologies that we are tracking with the notion of the intelligent age, AI, and particularly Gen AI, over the past few years is a game changer,” he said, underscoring the need for standards to assure the ethical use of that technology.

“We are quite clear-eyed about the opportunities of these technologies, particularly AI, but also quite clear-eyed about what are the risks and how important it is that we deploy those technologies with ethical, societal, and other considerations,” he said.

“There is no intelligent age if there is no healthy planet, and without collaboration, we will not be able to build and address the climate and nature emergency,” warned Gim Huay Neo, managing director of the WEF.

“The climate and nature crisis requires urgent attention and action,” she said, noting that annual global warming reached 1.54 degrees Celsius above the pre-industrial average last year.

“A lot of the focus of the annual meeting will thus be on what are the issues and the challenges … and in addressing the solutions that can help address the crisis,” she said.

Klaus Schwab, founder and chairman of the board of trustees of the WEF, touted the importance of bringing together thousands of decision-makers from governments, business, and civil society at the beginning of the year “to address the challenges of a world in deep transformation.”

“Despite divergent positions and great uncertainties, the annual meeting 2025 will foster a spirit of cooperation and constructive optimism with the objective of shaping the forthcoming Intelligent Age in a more sustainable and inclusive way,” he said.
…

London — Support appears to be growing in the West to fully seize hundreds of billions of dollars’ worth of Russian assets that were frozen following Moscow’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, amid speculation that U.S. President-elect Donald Trump will try to seek a peace deal between Moscow and Kyiv soon after he takes office next week.

Nations, including the United States, Canada, Britain, several European Union members states and Japan, froze about $300 billion of assets owned by Russia’s Central Bank after Moscow’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. Some $200 billion of the assets are held in the Euroclear facility in Brussels, with approximately $5 billion frozen in the United States.

U.S. media reported Tuesday that outgoing President Joe Biden is making a last-minute push for European allies to fully seize the assets so they can be used as leverage in any future peace negotiations.

Some European lawmakers are pushing for the assets to be given to Ukraine, however, to buy weapons and help to rebuild the country. Others fear that seizing the assets would deter investors and destabilize Western currencies.

Moscow has said that any seizure of its assets would be illegal and has pledged to retaliate.

Ukraine reconstruction

Ukraine’s reconstruction costs will reach at least $486 billion over the next decade, according to a February 2024 report by the Ukrainian government, the World Bank Group, the European Commission and the United Nations.

Britain holds about $22 billion worth of Russian assets. Lawmakers voted last week in favor of a nonbinding motion to seize the assets and give the money to Kyiv.

Member of Parliament Mike Martin, who brought the motion, cited uncertainty over future military aid for Kyiv under Trump.

“We do know that he feels differently about Ukraine. He feels differently about the security of Europe, and he feels differently about Russia. So, if we want to shift the dial on Ukraine, especially in the face of a drawdown or potential drawdown in U.S. support, we need to go further and faster, and we need to seize these $300 billions of frozen assets and send them to Ukraine,” Martin told lawmakers.

Geopolitical signals

“It is not just about actions that lead to practical outcomes. It is also about signals that we send to our geopolitical opponents. … Any potential small amount of financial instability that the G7 countries moving together will create will be miniscule as compared to the financial instability of Ukraine losing this war,” Martin said.

The Liberal Democrat MP was among the signatories to a letter to The Times of London newspaper earlier this month calling for concerted European action to seize the assets. It also was signed by senior lawmakers from Germany, Poland, the Baltic countries and Finland.

“Previous loans and emergency funding are not enough — and leave Western taxpayers on the hook. Only using the assets themselves ensures that Russia pays for its crimes,” the letter said.

G7 loans

G7 nations already are providing Ukraine with $50 billion in loans, using the Russian assets as collateral. Additionally, the interest earned on the frozen assets is being used to fund aid for Kyiv.

Any decision by the incoming Trump administration to cut U.S. aid for Kyiv could prompt Europe to seize the Russian assets, said Alexander Kolyandr of the Center for European Policy Analysis.

“We would have a fear of abandoning Ukraine to Putin’s war machine. And honestly, I suspect if it comes to that, the decision would be to give this money to Ukraine.”

US weapons

Kyiv could pledge to use the assets to purchase American weapons and secure Trump’s support, Kolyandr added.

“It fits nicely into the America First idea. It helps Ukraine to get the arms. It helps Trump to score some victories at home,” he told VOA.

There is some opposition in Europe, though, to seizing the assets.

European fears

“The reservations are mostly coming from the European Central Bank and the national governments,” Kolyandr said. “They are afraid that if they seize the Russian assets or practically nationalize them and give it to Ukraine, then it would thwart trust in the euro as a reserve currency — and foreign countries would be pretty afraid of investing their sovereign assets in European stocks, shares, bonds and currency.

“In my view, if a foreign country had any reservations about the safety of its sovereign assets, those reservations should have appeared … when the assets were frozen,” Kolyandr said.
…

Support is growing in the West to seize hundreds of billions of dollars’ worth of Russian assets that were frozen following Moscow’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine. As Henry Ridgwell reports, European allies fear incoming U.S. President Donald Trump may slash military aid for Kyiv – and some say the Russian assets could make up the shortfall.
…

As Russian President Vladimir Putin and his key ally, Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko, organize waves of illegal immigration into the EU as a tool of their hybrid war against the West, Poland has been building a wall on the border with Belarus, shielding itself from current and potentially future Russia’s hostile efforts.

The wall, more than 5 meters high, stretches for more than 136 kilometers. However, illegal migrants bused to the border by Russian and Belarusian authorities increasingly use garden ladders to scale the wall and get into Poland.

Click here for the full story in Russian.
…

The Russian army is strengthening its positions in villages around the key eastern Ukrainian town of Pokrovsk in an attempt to encircle it and lay siege to a vital transport hub linking embattled Donbas with the rest of Ukraine. Ukrainian forces have been repelling the Russian attacks so far, but the battle is continuing for every remaining house in the villages surrounding Pokrovsk.

Click here for the full story in Russian.
…

The White House says it has finalized rules that crack down on Chinese and Russian automobile technology effectively banning all personal smart cars from the two countries from entering the U.S. market.

In a White House fact sheet detailing the decision, the Biden administration Tuesday said that while connected vehicles offer advantages, the involvement of foreign adversaries such as China and Russia in their supply chains presents serious risks granting “malign actors unfettered access to these connected systems and the data they collect.”

“The Department of Commerce has issued a final rule that will prohibit the sale and import of connected vehicle hardware and software systems, as well as completed connected vehicles, from the PRC and Russia,” the fact sheet said.

PRC is the acronym for China’s official name, the People’s Republic of China.

Connected vehicles are smart cars that are designed to be convenient for consumers and provide safety for drivers, passengers, and pedestrians through the use of many connected parts such as Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, cellular, and satellite connectivity.

“Cars today aren’t just steel on wheels; they’re computers,” said Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo when speaking on the rule.

“This is a targeted approach to ensure we keep PRC- and Russian-manufactured technologies off American roads,” said Raimondo.

The new rule is the “culmination of a year-long examination” of potential risks posed by connected vehicles and will “help the United States defend against the PRC’s cyber espionage and intrusion operations, which continue to pose a significant threat to U.S. critical infrastructure and public safety.”

The crackdown on cars follows Washington’s announcement earlier this month that the U.S. consider new rules aimed at addressing risks posed by drones that utilize technology from China and Russia.

The U.S. has repeatedly emphasized the need to balance technological progress with the protection of national security interests.
…

PARIS — France’s new prime minister, Francois Bayrou, announced Tuesday the renegotiation of a contested plan raising the retirement age from 62 to 64, in a crucial move to seek more stability for his minority government. 

In his first address to lawmakers at the National Assembly, Bayrou said: “I’m choosing to put this subject back on the agenda, with the social partners, for a short time and under transparent conditions.” 

Bayrou vowed to seek “a new path of reform, without any totems or taboos, not even the retirement age,” as long as the financing for the changes is guaranteed. 

President Emmanuel Macron’s plan to raise the retirement age from 62 to 64 unleashed months of mass protests from January to June 2023 that damaged his leadership. 

Bayrou also outlined other top priorities, including key budget decisions, one month after he was appointed by Macron. 

What is Bayrou proposing? 

Bayrou urgently needs to pass a budget bill for 2025. Following the collapse of the previous government, an emergency law has been approved to enable the state to levy taxes from Jan. 1, pay basic expenses and avoid a shutdown. 

But only a proper budget would help reduce France’s deficit and allow key expenses such as defense measures needed amid the war in Ukraine or aid promised to angry farmers. 

Financial markets, ratings agencies and the European Commission are pushing France to comply with EU rules limiting debt and keep France’s borrowing costs from spiraling. That would threaten the prosperity of eurozone countries. 

France’s deficit is estimated to reach 6% of its gross domestic product in 2024. Bayrou on Tuesday said the government was aiming for a deficit of 5.4% this year, with the goal to reduce it to 3% — in line with EU rules — by 2029. 

Can the government be toppled again? 

Bayrou’s Cabinet relies on a fragile deal between Macron’s centrist allies and conservatives of The Republicans party who even together have no parliamentary majority. 

The previous government was in place for only three months before being brought down by opposition lawmakers from both the left and the far right amid a budget dispute. 

To avoid a repetition of that scenario, Bayrou seeks to secure a nonaggression pact with the Socialists so that they wouldn’t support any future move to topple the new government. 

The Socialists said they are open to talks on the condition that they would include negotiations on the pension reform. 

However, the possibility of another no-confidence vote is still looming. 

The hard-left France Unbowed party refused to enter into talks with the government and already announced it would file a no-confidence motion. 

A vote later this week would have little chance of succeeding as the far right appears unwilling to support such a move in the immediate term. 

Yet the question could be raised again during the future budget debate at parliament, with more uncertainty on the result. 

Why are pension reform talks key? 

The pension reform, which was enacted into law in April 2023 despite mass protests, has gradually started being implemented. It also requires people to work 43 years to receive a full pension. 

The Socialists urged Bayrou to announce a “suspension” of the reform with the aim of backtracking on the age of 64 and introducing specific measures for those who have long careers and certain professions considered to be hard work. 

Bayrou on Tuesday stopped short of announcing such a move, yet his proposal to renegotiate it appears as a hand stretched out towards the left. 

He suggested the age of 64, which was the most criticized change, could possibly be decreased depending on the outcome of the negotiations. 

“We cannot deteriorate the financial balance” of the pension system, Bayrou insisted. 

On the other side of the political spectrum, the conservatives had warned against any suspension of the pension changes. 

“If we were to repeal the pension reform, the cost would be 3.4 billion euros ($3.47 billion) in 2025 and almost 16 billion ($16.3 billion) in 2032,” said the president of the Senate, Gerard Larcher, a conservative. 

Does the far right still have leverage? 

Far-right leader Marine Le Pen — Macron’s fiercest rival — was instrumental in ousting the previous government. 

Bayrou consulted her when forming the new government, and Le Pen remains a powerful force. Her National Rally party has the largest single group in the National Assembly, France’s powerful lower house of parliament. 

In recent days, Bayrou’s government sought to sideline Le Pen by negotiating instead with the Socialists, the Greens and the Communists on budget issues. 

The president of the National Rally, Jordan Bardella, criticized those talks and warned Monday that his party would oppose any budget that would raise the cost of medication, provide more health care for migrants staying illegally in the country and impose new taxes on businesses. Such measures would justify a no-confidence vote, he said. 

But Le Pen faces her own headaches in the months to come — a March court ruling over alleged illegal party financing could see her barred from running for office.
…

GENEVA — U.S. President Donald Trump will take part virtually in the World Economic Forum’s annual meeting in Davos just days after his inauguration, the forum president said Tuesday. 

Borge Brende, a former Norwegian foreign minister who heads the Geneva-based organization, noted that Trump had twice attended the elite gathering of business, government and other leaders in person during his first term. 

“On Thursday afternoon, he will join us digitally, online, live in a dialogue with our participants,” Brende told reporters Tuesday as he presented the five-day program that will start Monday — the day of Trump’s inauguration. 

“We think that will be a very special moment,” he added, notably to help learn the administration’s “policy priorities.” 

Brende said he didn’t know whether Elon Musk, the multibillionaire who is poised to co-lead Trump’s new Department of Government Efficiency, would attend, but said the forum expects “additional, high-level representation” from the administration once confirmation processes for Trump’s nominees get underway in the U.S. Senate as early as Monday. 

Forum organizers say a record of around 900 business leaders, including from important emerging markets, will take part in the annual meeting this year, which is expected to draw nearly 3,000 participants from over 130 countries. 

With climate change, war, global tensions, economic uncertainty and other issues in mind, Brende acknowledged that the 55th annual meeting of the forum will take place “against the most complicated geopolitical backdrop in generations.” 

“But still in that fragmented and partly polarized world, there are still areas where we can collaborate and … we have big opportunities and responsibilities to find those areas where there is a possibility to improve the state of the world,” he said. The theme of this year’s edition is “Collaboration for the Intelligent Age” — a nod to the growing importance of technology in the world. 

The WEF has long been derided as a gathering of world elites who plot the future at a cushy, snow-bound powwow in the Swiss Alps. Critics often argue the developing world gets less attention than global powers and big business in the West or Gulf states. 

Forum managing director Mirek Dusek insisted that the number of businesses from developing countries in the “Global South” was growing, and the attendance of their leaders was “on parity” with the participation of leaders in the developed world. 

Ursula Von Der Leyen, president of the European Union’s executive commission, plans to attend the opening day of meetings on Tuesday, after an introductory gala the night before. Other top envoys include President Javier Milei of Argentina, President Cyril Ramaphosa of South Africa, and Chinese Vice-Premier Ding Xuexiang. 

The vast array of topics will include the future of Syria — its new foreign minister is expected to attend — after the fall of President Bashar al-Assad last month; the fight against climate change; the threats and promise of artificial intelligence; global trade and economic growth; and wars in places like Ukraine, Sudan and beyond. 

“We are ready to roll up our sleeves to make the best out of a situation where we are faced with many, many challenges,” Brende said.
…