highways and 20% goes to transit. i would love to see that flipped. >> bike lanes and bike laws and bus service on roads and car infrastructure. >> we also need to update federal policy related to new so their current residence are not displaced and new residents of all incomes are included. quakes looking across the country and it resulted in neighborhoods being picked apart the planning decision and we like to think we all learn from that. >> what happens next will be crucial not only for climate change but also for communities like langley park. >> to watch this and all winning entries, visit our websites at studentcam.org. a discussion now on democracy

and the russia-ukraine war with ukrainian human rights activists in the president of the national democratic institute. cohosted by the ndi in the women's foreign policy group, topics include democracy in ukraine, gender-based violence and war crimes against ukrainians, and the role of the u.s. and other allies in their support for ukraine. this is an hour. >> ok, we are ready when you are. >> good morning, everybody.

i am the executive director director of the women's foreign policy group. on behalf of our board and our staff and our co-organizer today , we warmly welcome you. for almost 30 years, the women's foreign policy group has promoted, empowered, elevated and advanced women's participation in leadership in international affairs for our global public policy forum, amplifying women's voices, a robust mentorship program and our networking forum for our 800 plus members, connecting young professionals just starting out in their first jobs, and leading women at the pinnacle of their careers. women's participation in key areas provides a multitude of benefits, in peace processes and negotiations, it has endured lasting peace agreements. in government leadership it decreases human rights abuses and conflict relapse. in economics, it increases economic diversification, decreases income inequality, and

boost productivity in the business bottom line. the data is there. women are change engines, yet they are underrepresented in federal areas. in elected office, in the civil service, the military and the private sector. we aim to change that. if you are not already a member, please consider connecting with us, become a changemaker and join us on our journey. it is our honored today to cohost this event with our valued partner, ndi, highlighting two incredible women leaders. the first woman president of ndi , dr., -- dr. kaufman and the founder for civil liberties of ukraine and our dear friend and supporter for which we are very grateful. thank you for your tireless work

on the global stage as trailblazers. as we like to say and is a great billy jean king once said, you have to see it to be at, so thank you for serving as role models to so many in your pursuit of justice of a quality of democratic values. special thanks to ndi for hosting us today in a special thanks to her team ended big thank you as always to the team. it is my pleasure to introduce our moderator, who will introduce our panelist. >> this is the director of audience development and head of social media at the hill. she got her start writing about sports in india before heading to london where she was mostly in charge of booking ukrainian hotels for correspondence during the 2014 invasion as an intern at the times of london. after a couple of years of

political reporting in india at network 18, she moved to esquire magazine in dubai. they moved to the u.s. in 2020 and started at the hill after getting a second masters at the university of delaware. she has an undergraduate degree from the university of mobile and a masters degree in international journalism from city university of london. she has previously reported on ukrainian women in the war. thank you very much for anchoring this conversation today, over to you. >> good morning, everyone. i'm so glad to be here today. i hope everyone can hear me. i'm excited to be on stage with these two very accomplished women who have just shown in their careers and have been such great role models. i would like to introduce the doctor who is the first woman president of the ndi, as well as alexandra, who is from the center of civil liberties of ukraine.

so, you already heard from them, let's get right to it. i'm very delighted to be here to moderate this panel discussion. in the ukraine war, we see the world's most important time in government, russia, china, iran and north korea. seemingly an alliance to crush a democratic government. why is ukraine so important for the future of democracy, and what are the global implications of this war? quex thank you, i think that really is a core question for all of us, and for world leaders. and i want to thank you in the whole team at women's foreign policy for the partnership, we are very proud to host her for this conversation. so actually, democracy is fundamentally about self-determination, it's about the ability of people to choose their communities task, their

country's task for the future, and that's what ukrainians have been working to do ever since 1991 and long before. and i would say, speaking personally, the ukrainian people have been inspiring and their persistence, their commitment, their courage to achieve full democracy, to achieve sovereignty and self-determination. -- on long before putin invaded for the first time in 2014. and putin invaded precisely because the ukrainians were succeeding in that struggle. after the euro maidan revolution. in ukrainians today, even amidst this conflict, fighting for their country's arrival, are still fighting to advance,

protect and strengthen ukrainian democracy. so i think that they are an inspiration to democratic actors globally. i think putin also clearly sees their democratic resilience and determination as a threat to his own rule, to his ability to control his neighbors, and to the strength and solidarity of a democratic europe that ukraine aspires to be a part of. that's what's at stake here. and, as you noted, the coalition of autocrats that is now supporting his efforts to supply his military with horrific weapons, that represents the broader stakes that autocracies see in this struggle of a russian imperial power against a small neighbor that wants to

remain independent, sovereign and democratic. >> you have been a champion for ukrainian democracy for years. what do you see as the greatest threat to ukraine's democracy today, but beyond the military of russia itself, what would you like our audience to know about the ukrainian-democratic process, even while it's under assault right now? >> this is something which is not properly reasonable for international audience, that we in ukraine got a chance for democratic tradition just 10 years ago, and we vote for this chance. it was not given us for granted. millions of people stood out their voice 10 years ago against authoritarian and corrupt government, and they bravely demonstrated just for a chance to show the country why the

rights of everybody are protected. it is independent and it is not with this demonstrated. more than 100 peaceful protesters were brutally gunned down in the main square. so we got this chance with a high price to start a democratic position in our country, but in order to focus on this, russia invaded. russia occupied crimea, parts of the region in two years ago russia extended this ward to the large-scale invasion. because putin is not afraid of nato. putin is afraid of the idea of freedom, which could close the russian borders, and that is why , in this world, we are fighting for freedom in all senses. for freedom to be independent country. for freedom to preserve our ukrainian identity and not to be forced to make ukrainian

children russians. and for their freedom to have our democratic choice. like this chance to build a country where the rights of everybody are protected. and during the large-scale war -- large-scale war, we have no luxury, just to focus only on survival issues. we have this process started and we see our victory in a very and vicious way. it's not just to repeal russian troops out but to succeed in democratic tradition. that is why success of ukraine and military defeat of russia is so important. we have to demonstrate a positive example of transformation because this is a chance for the democratic future of russia itself. >> we talk a lot about the authoritarian assault on democracy and about the democratic decline in general. what would you say -- where would you say is democracy

really doing well in the world today, and what would a successful democracy look like at the end of this year of global elections? >> i think this is the question we are focused on every day here at ndi. there is no doubt that we are facing a more challenging operating environment around the world for democratic actors. we see the authoritarian solidarity that you noted earlier. and we need some matches with democratic solidarity. i actually see a lot of reasons for hope and resilience. and i can think of just a couple of recent examples. a few weeks ago in senegal, we had a peaceful political transition that, a few months ago, looked like it wasn't going to happen. last year there were several

clues across western africa and senegal backed that trend. why, how did it do that? first about, it has a strong tradition of democracy and a strong civil society. so when the president first floated the idea that maybe he could stay in power didn't need to have a presidential election, the public mobilization was instant. then you had an independent judiciary that did its job and upheld the rules of the political game, the rules of the constitution and said, no, you must hold your election on time. finally, we had a international solid billet -- solidarity and other partners on the ground to support our civil society partners in monitoring the election and democratic governments making clear to the president that he needed to allow this election to go forward. the result was not just a

peaceful transfer of power, which we shouldn't take for granite, i wish we could, but the election of the youngest leader on the african continent, who two weeks before, was still in prison. so i find that very hopeful. i find the inauguration of the president of guatemala very hopeful. that was a combination of judicial oversight, civil society mobilization and international solidarity. you could see the local elections in turkey, which saw a resurgence of opposition parties, the recent elections in poland, there are a lot of indicators that democratic governments, democratic parties are strong and resilient, and that's what makes me hopeful. so when i think about the end of this year, i would like to see ukraine not just surviving, but

succeeding on its path to pushback against russia aggression militarily, and strengthening its own democracy and its path towards europe. and i would like to see some of these very high-stakes elections in huge democracies like india, go off successfully, peacefully, and manifest that renewal of democratic authority. >> following up on that, how does ndi then supports democracy in a country like ukraine but in the middle of a war, and what you say to people who argue that there is no room for a political debate and political competition until after the wars over? >> i think alexandra just why we cannot just wait until the wars over. and i think that ndi works in environments in ukraine and in other places around the world where conflict is part of the

everyday reality of the citizens. and citizens every day also want jobs, they want good education for their kids. they want to be able to imagine a better future and filled it for themselves. and the ability to resolve a conflict in a peaceful and lasting manner relies on that solution being one that will enable them to meet their goals. so, i don't think you could separate participation, inclusion and accountability from successful conflict resolution. and i think that we have, in a lot of social science evidence, to suggest that the more participatory and inclusive the conflict rebel -- resolution processes, the more successful it is. in ukraine, not only do we have long-standing partnerships with people like alexandra in her

work at her organization's work on accountability and transparency, human rights protection, we also do a lot of work with local governments because this was a major advance after the euro made on resolute -- revolution was the decentralization of power so that government could be closer to citizens and more responsive at the local levels. we do a lot with mayors, city councils, local civil society. what we are trying to do across these programs is try to connect citizens, democratic institutions, and political parties and other democratic actors. they can each do their work well, but they have to be in conversation with each other in order for the democracy to deliver. >> many ukrainians believe that elections in democratic processes should take place

after the wars over. an election that would've taken place on march 31 would've happened because the country is under martial law. when is the right time for these democratic processes to resume? and could they take place even as ukraine is actively fighting against the invasion? >> first constitution of ukraine conducted election during the martial law. in the world and there are a lot of practical problems, which we have to float in order to have real elections, not just a turn. recently some performances happen in russia. the opposition leader, and of all he was killed in prison.

during the war, even if you would have known this constitution, it's very difficult to organize because where can we find the money for this? second, how to provide millions of people who became refugees. third, how to provide right to world for people who live in the territories. how to provide the rights to participate in the electoral process for enormous amount of people who joined forces. in elections, it's not just the last day when you go to the electoral polling place and put your document there, it's a whole process. you have to provide competitive conditions for all candidates,

for all political parties and observers have to come, how they will come to the place where there are still people in danger. so a lot of practical questions, which we have to solve, but the problem is that we really have no idea, either we enter the war in the middle of the war or just at the beginning of the war. so i think that we have to start to think how to solve this spectacle question. because if it takes two roles, we have to find solution. >> may i just add a couple of points. i think the challenges were outlined brilliantly in some of those challenges have potential technical solutions. we have to decide if those solutions are good enough. and other partners can and are

consulting with our ukrainian partners. but i think it's worth noting that ukrainians themselves, regardless of their political preference, they are overwhelmingly supportive of continuing this democratic path. in the polling that we've done inside ukraine, 85 percent of ukrainians don't want elections while the wars ongoing. so they understand the challenges and they want a high quality election, an election in which everyone can participate because that's what will produce the most legitimate outcome. i would also say that even if we all recognize that that is the practical reality for now, none of that means that there is no democracy in ukraine. there is a functioning parliament with very robust debates. there's an incredibly active civil society and they are one representative among many, and so the debate, the political discussion in ukraine is ongoing, and election is one

part. >> coming back to your work, you have described your work with gender-based violence is working with pure human pain. >> my own reporting has led me to hear some of these women survivors stories in the first-hand experiences that they've had under the war and invasion. can you tell us more about your work and what these people have gone through over the last two years? >> thank you for this question. let me first describe what sexual violence means here in the war. because there is a huge difference. when we think about sexual violence, this is a crime, which provides opportunity for russians troops through the conflict targeting the whole community, how it works, survivors and sex -- of sexual

violence fell shame, they are your neighbors, they are relatives, they feel guilt. a lot of rapes and other forms of sexual violence were conducted and they cannot do anything with it. there are other members of the community that feel fear because they can be subjected to the same treatment. when we put all this different shame, fear, guilt, it's decreased connection among people in societies. this means it helps russia to face it over the territorial community. that is how it works and that is why it's so important that we have survivors of sexual violence who are not given silence, who find a bravery to speak about their horrible experience they went through,

and even more, they created a network and they work for several years to help others, men and women. it's extreme bravery and this means that in this history, there are survivors of sexual violence will be just victims. >> my reporting -- speaking with these women it has shown that it's about them finding the strength to live their life after what they've been through it and have the time to process it, so can you expand a bit more on how some of these women deal with the challenges they face now in their life with having been displaced or maybe not being able to go home? >> let me describe the violence

in russian detention. there are hundreds of people who survived from that. and when naming our first report, testimony of people who survived, this is -- because people told me, they were a victim, raped, smashed into wooden boxes, their fingers were cut, one woman told me how her i was took out with a spoon. this is horrible. butchers, which conducted not just for hours, but for some people for years and years. can you imagine the challenge to return to your normal life after such a horrible experience. it's not easy. hostage in russian captivity,

they tried to liquidate your personalities. like, erode your personality. and that is why it is extremely important for us and for society to create a sensitive ecosystem to help these people return to their normal life. to put their interest in the center of the system. for example, in february and march in 2022, the first months of the war, we faced numerous cases of sexual violence, which was conducted by russian -- russian soldiers. it started distributing it. first we put contacts of people and organizations who could provide medical support, who could provide psychological support. only then, contacts of people

who could provide legal support. because first people need to secure, to restore from their horror, which they were experienced. in the most accessed chapter was when we spoke with -- because we have people in russian occupation and we have known the hostilities going on. this means that women and men probably have no professional and medical assistance. we consulted this person who made this last chapter. when you have no access to medical, professional treatment. so this is how it was. >> as the work has shown us in the work of other ukrainian activists have shown, this war

has seen horrific gender-based violence, including use of rape as a weapon of war and that is a sad feature of modern conflicts. it can have lasting effects on the inclusion of women in peace building in democratic politics. so how does ndi work to address some of these challenges? >> thank you for the question. i think that's exactly right. ndi, led by our dear former chair, madeleine albright, who we miss every day, began work years ago to address gender-based violence in politics because our work around the world has shown that, even as we give women the skills and the confidence to engage in political participation, even as we remove the barriers to

women's political participation, they then face disproportionate attacks on social media, physical attacks. and that deters women from remaining in the political process. if that's true for women who were not already survivors of gender-based violence, and imagine the impact if you are a survivor of conflict based sexual violence and then want to engage in politics in the post-conflict time. for us at ndi, what this has meant his building into a lot of our day-to-day program -- programmatic work. trauma infirmed -- so we can address the needs of our participants, where they are. as well as, working in our programs with local partners on solutions that they can develop

in bringing survivors to help develop those solutions to combat gender-based violence so that these survivors will not have to continue to face those patterns in the post-conflict time. >> alessandro, they have advanced justice of survivors is an important task as we have seen from your work, what is the right balance right now between international and ukrainian legal action in dealing with this issue, and is an international tribunal a necessary step? >> we are lucky to have international step into the process and you probably heard they made the first orient letting the commissioner for the child trafficking called a legal term for legal deportation of

ukrainian children to russia. and it's very important because even those politicians who want to return to business as usual with russia, have to take the effect that they have to shake hands with the biggest child kidnapper in the world. and this is not a political statement, this is a legal decision. so, that is why it is so important, and the recent gains for military leadership for russian federation, which destroyed energy infrastructure to ukraine is a good continuation. but the national criminal court will limit its investigation only to several selected cases. it means that 98% of atrocities will still remain the responsibilities of national system. and what is going on for a moment, the office of general prosecutor registered more than

122,000 criminal proceedings only for those two years. russia uses war crimes as a massive overseer. it's how russia tried to win this war. russia tried -- in order to break our resistance. too much pain when you cannot even act. so this is the goal. and that is why ukrainian system faced with the challenge how to effectively investigate and persecute, 122,000 criminal proceedings, i'm sorry, it's impossible even for the best national system in the world, we are not the best national system in the world, this is something that has to be changed, and we are thinking how to ingrain international elements into international investigation and justice in the second important

issue, there is no international court that can prosecute putin and his surroundings for the crime of aggression. in all these atrocities that are now documented his resolve of their leadership decision to start this war. this is a common logic. if you want to prevent wars in the future, you have the states and the leaders who were present. but in the whole history it was a precedent in trials. all others from yugoslavia, they judge people who kill each other on proportionately. or with enormous suffering. we have to prohibit it. special -- and putin, high

military command of the russian state accountable. >> given the complexity for the case, in which many perpetrators, like you said, will be in russia, or otherwise -- or otherwise hidden regions that it will be difficult to bring them to justice, are you confident that the perpetrators of this war will be held responsible whether in the national system or via international tribunal? >> i would doubt it would be affected by this war. i know that people suggest very differently. for some people justice means to see their perpetrator behind bars. for in some people it means to get compensation and without this, they will feel -- they will feel unsatisfied seeing perpetrators behind the bar. for some people justice means the possibility to know truth, what happened.

for another people, justice means a chance to be heard and to have public recognition that something has happened with them . not just immoral, but legal. it means that we have to develop comprehensive justice strategies at appropriate infrastructure for the strategy. and to put perpetrators under the bar, it's one element of the strategy, just one element. but even focusing on this element we know that justice can have long-term and short-term impact. in long-term impact, history of humankind convinces authoritarian regime collapse. in leaders who see themselves as untouchable appear in the court. serbia didn't want to transfer them to the hague, but they did.

but intra-term is also important. this is something which people don't understand about justice because they think justice has input into the past, will punish people from things they have already done or impact of the future. if you do with the same, you will be punished. if people start to doubt that now they will not avoid responsibility like russia enjoyed impunity for a decade in chechnya, moldova, syria, that this time they will be punished, it will have a frozen effects for the brutality of their actions. and when we speak about the war, it means that we can save thousands, thousands and thousands of lives.

>> some of those ndi's work in ukraine have been conducted with an ion ukraine's recovery. a couple of years ago we heard about a plan from the german nationals to build ukraine after the war. the war has to end for that to happen. how important will collaboration and inclusion be after the war is over, and how can ndi help, what are some of the challenges that we see with this ongoing situation? >> i think post-conflict reconstruction will be an immense challenge for ukraine, but i also think ukraine has tremendous resources. as a highly educated, young population that is tech savvy, that has skills for all kind of industry, and i think that there

is already interested in investing in ukraine's future and i think that there will be more once the conflict ends. from an ndi perspective, i think that there are important roles that we can play in a couple of ways. number one is to support the ukrainian civil society in ensuring that the investors, the businesses that come into ukraine, that grow in ukraine in the wake of the war do not reestablish old patterns of economic relations with the state, old patterns of corruption that led to the democratic movements in euro. supporting anticorruption reforms in the government, at the local level, at the national level, very important. i think another main outline of effort for us is working with our local partners on inclusion. we have talked a lot about what

we need to do to ensure that women can participate fully and equally in that first conflict phase. but i think the same is going to be important for people with disabilities, especially in the wake of some of the horrific violence that we have seen, and the injury suffered both by ukrainian soldiers and ukrainian civilians. the mining, the extent of landmines across ukraine means that we will see, unfortunately, victims, including a lot of civilian fig dems, in the years to come. that means that ensuring inclusive procedures and rules for people with disabilities is going to be important for all ukrainians. we have seen that in the other conflict like lebanon. i thicket will be important for ukraine as well. because this is a young country, inclusion and politics is also

very important. in other underrepresented groups. so, again, if the politics in the postwar period is not fully inclusive politics, that peace may not hold and it's important that we do everything we can now to prepare for that. >> you have been at the capital all of yesterday. eight ukraine has become an intensely politicized issue in the u.s. we are currently seeing it right now in congress. today and tomorrow we will see most of it. but aside from the financial and military assistance being provided, what do you think the u.s. and its allies can do to help the persecuted people in ukraine, as well as the victims of the war? >> the united states can do a lot. the united states has a powerful intelligence and can gather a lot of evidence which can help

us to make this connection between -- and decisions of top level officials of the russians. this is something which is necessary and i was very glad when the united states decided to cooperate with the international criminal court and provided this. it was unprecedented. before, you know united states was -- they had a difficult connection with international criminal court. it's very important that that critical decision was taken. but the united states content to take a very moral stance in the discussion that is still going on. and how it was conducted before officials. you have two strategies. you can create special tribunal

like a hybrid court a part of a national system, which is easier. it means that this court will have no power to persecute putin as acting head of the state for the crime of aggressions. according to international law, the acting head of the state's immunity among the national court. and there is a second strategy. you can play it as international court and overcome the unity. in the whole discussion that's going on about this thing. and when i speak with officials from the united states and experts from the united states, i tried to share this very simple thing, how we can communicate to the people in ukraine, people in the united states and worldwide that we spent on norma's efforts to create this to persecute people

who are responsible for the crime of aggression. in this has no power to persecute the most responsible person. it's ridiculous. it's literally ridiculous. that is why we need the voice of the united states and favored to play it as international court and to stop this impunity, which putin, personally, enjoyed. >> in addition to winning the war, as you said, ukraine was also when the postwar peace. what are some of the important reforms ukrainians can make to strengthen its democracy and sustain it, and it's -- and achieve its ascension to the eu? >> it's a very good question but i will answer with describing the situation. sometimes it's not understandable for people that, to conduct democratic transition

is difficult, even during peaceful times. united states made sanctuaries to develop state institutions within years. but to conduct democratization during the large-scale war is extremely difficult. it's logic of the war. logic of the war dictates the decentralization. logical dictates that you have to limit freedoms due to securities. for example, we have curfew in kyiv and other cities in ukraine. the logic of democratization dictates that you have to expand the space, rights, and freedoms. it's very difficult to balance between this. that we have to, because we now, in europe, have an immigration process. in last september they started

an official -- about -- negotiation about joining ukraine to the european union. this is very important because it shows as priorities, it shows kurt tereus. it encourages people that, yes, it's very difficult to do this during a large-scale war. but either we will be ambitious enough to do it, we will succeed. this is very important. for me, it's for human rights. probably, it's in interest what we will have independent tradition yuri, we will have less work in ukraine. >> before i open to the audience a question, i want to say, what makes you hopeful about the future of democracy? let's end on a hopeful note. >> ok, so, i have already mentioned i think some of the developments we have seen in

other parts of the world that give me hope. i think that the thing that truly brings me hope in ukraine is people like alessandro. -- ukraine has an incredibly robust civil society. ndi has been partnering with civil society in ukraine for 32 years. and we have seen this community through a lot of ups and downs, maintaining its determination, maintain its focus. they helped organize immediate response to the further invasion to provide directly for community needs, and to keep holding the government accountable, and to keep pressing for democratic reforms, and to reform to european union candidacy. and they have achieved a lot of wins, even in these last two years.

reforming the energy sector and other things i could point to. i think that with the tool of eu candidacy now, it brings even more momentum to this work. i think what we are trying to do on the ground is support our partners in their priorities, bring together the democratic accountability with the human rights work for -- for example, she talked about freedom of expression in the media space, supporting actors who are reporting on work crimes and human rights abuses so that this is -- so that this information is available to the public and part of the public conversation, not only in judicial processes. so i see a lot to be hopeful about, and i agree with her that , one of the key factors to keep ukrainian civil society going and moving forward, is the

support of the international community. that solidarity is absolutely critical, and it comes in the form of money and weapons to keep ukrainians fighting on the front lines. and it also comes in the form of support for people like her and the work they are doing. >> now we have time for a couple of questions from people in the audience. >> we have exhausted you all? [laughter] >> i have a couple more. >> i studied in the soviet union, visited ukraine then, discovered a program to teach the children to hates. i have to admit, it didn't work, there was no hate that i detected, russians towards americans. one of the concerns i have about this conflict now is the emergence of hate.

i don't know where we go from here. with russia -- with ukraine toward russia, russia toward the united states, back then there were still a sense of gratitude that we had been allies in the second world war. i think that's pretty much gone now. i don't know how to walk this back at this point. it has gotten so deep, and the implications for the future are so horrible, what do we do now to deal with this hate that i see emerging? >> thank you for this question. it's not easy, but i will try to answer and i have two comments. first, let me share a story that this was some special group.

she asked people from the russian side, you wait from putin, from russian parliament, from russian cultural elite, from russian people, some from russian army. a majority of ukrainians answered, to nobody. which means that ukrainians don't need excuse, they need something else. what do they need? in 2022, a ukrainian pole was conducted in people -- were asked, what will be the main disappointment for you when the war will finish. 65% of people answered that, the main disappointment will be impunity from russian war crimes. people in ukraine need justice, and then will go further.

the second will be that this is not just a problem of russian-ukrainian war. too much hate, even here in the united states of america. and this is a lot of routes that explain this. now we will live in digital world. we spend more and more time there. and social networks make posts and emotional connotation to spread more quicker. and scientists prove that negative emotions spread much more quicker. this means that we now start to live in an environment which is diluted with negative emotion. in hate is visible present. i read some posts and comments, it seems like people try to kill

each other virtually. it's horrible. i know, as a human rights defender, that this violence can be easily transferred to real violence. recently i participated in an event in poland in memory of the cities. the previous authority started this information campaign against a mayor and this mayor was killed because people listened to the disinformation campaign, became angry, and decided to kill this mayor. even in developed democracies, we are poisoned with hate, and we have to do something with it. >> we have a question there. >> i know you spent yesterday in

congress speaking to our representatives. maybe there are parts of this conversation you do not want to share, but i wonder if you could explain how it went and what you think their main misunderstandings are on confusions were about most of this, what is a very straightforward case to support ukraine. oleksandra: thank you for the question. it is important because we all wait for a better tomorrow. i have hope that it will pass, because we have waited for this bill for eight months at least, and we are now in a very crucial time when russia spent 40% of their budget for military expenses, and this is just the official number, the real number is much higher. and military support in the united states congress is blocked. that is why russia -- in just

the last month, because for ukrainians it is very difficult to fight with empty hands. returning to your question, i am here in the united states for several weeks already. i provided public lectures in seven universities in different regions of the united states. public discussions, meetings, interviews, i always face a warm welcome from american audiences. this once again proves the social proof that people in the united states support ukraine and want this bill to be passed. the question is, how to push politicians to do their job and to fulfill their interest and desire people in the united states of america?

this is the question. >> any more questions? >> i think we would all like to continue having the discussion. i am the regional director for eurasia at ndi. i think we can all agree this has been an incredibly important and powerful conversation. as we were reminded today by our speakers, ukraine is on the front line of the global struggle between liberal democracy and authoritarianism. it's not kid ourselves, it is a ballpark against autocracy locally. what happens in ukraine will affect not only just the brave people of ukraine but will shape the fate of the entire europe,

eurasia region and beyond, and it is already doing so. ukraine is in the eyes largest -- ndi's largest program, and we have been snowboarding its democratic development since its independence in 1991. even while the war is ongoing, while missiles and bombs are falling, the government and people of ukraine, as we have heard today, are continuing to advance democratic reform. and we have the incredible pair -- the incredible privilege of working with amazing partners. thank you for your leadership, your bravery, the work you and your colleagues do to monitor and document war crimes, it is critical to justice being served. i would also like to thank dr. wittes for her leadership.

we are fortunate to have you at our home. and thank you for your superb moderation of a timely and difficult conversation. i would also like to thank ms. chopivsky and her colleagues at the women's foreign policy group. thank you for partnering with npi. and a big thank you to my npi colleagues who played such an important role in making this event happen. our wonderful staff who are around in here very early in the morning to make sure this came off. and then finally, a big thank you to you, our audience, for joining us today, and a big thank you to our board members. thank you for joining us. thanks, everyone. [applause]

[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2023] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org]