♪♪ >> Hello and welcome to "GZERO World."

I'm Ian Bremmer, coming to you today from Davos, Switzerland, home of the 2023 World Economic Forum.

This week for the 53rd time, a tiny town in the Swiss Alps becomes the epicenter for discussion and debate about some of the biggest issues the world is facing.

In total, 2,700 leaders from 130 countries were here, including 52 heads of state.

The big theme of the Forum this year?

Cooperation in a fragmented world, is it possible?

I asked some of the most prominent people here, and I'm bringing you those conversations.

And later, Renée Fleming in Davos.

Don't worry.

I've also got your "Puppet Regime."

>> Hi.

It's me, Vladimir Putin, just enjoying wintry stroll through the forest of my isolation.

>> But first, a word from the folks who help us keep the lights on.

>> Major corporate funding provided by founding sponsor First Republic.

At First Republic, our clients come first.

Taking the time to listen helps us provide customized banking and wealth-management solutions.

More on our clients at firstrepublic.com.

Additional funding provided by... ...and by... >> How would you describe the world in 2023?

Getting better?

Getting worse?

Hot mess?

Dumpster fire?

Depending on the issue we're discussing, all of those and more could be accurate.

But here's one many of you probably haven't heard -- polycrisis.

Ahead of this gathering in Davos, organizers of the Forum wrote, "We've run out of words to describe what's happening in the world today."

So they found a new one, polycrisis.

It basically means many risks at once compounding and making everything worse.

One publication described it as a tangle of knots spanning the globe that we're all trying to undo.

The story goes something like this.

The COVID pandemic caused mass economic havoc.

And just when the global economy was beginning to rebound, wham!

All along comes a war in Ukraine, further disrupting supply chains, driving more people into food insecurity, and creating an energy crisis.

Pile on top of that the ongoing climate emergency, mounting cybersecurity threats, and democracy in decline around the world, polycrisis sounds even too Swiss.

Those of you watching who are old enough to remember the 1970s might be thinking, "High inflation, climbing oil prices, a looming recession, I have seen this movie before."

But in many ways, you haven't.

Because in 1979, there were 4.3 billion people on planet Earth.

Late last year, on November 15th, the global population hit 8 billion, almost twice as many.

Between 1880 and 1980, the Earth's temperature rose by 0.14 degrees Fahrenheit every decade.

Between 1980 and now, more than double that.

It's literally a different world.

So how do we untangle those giant knots?

This week, thousands of leaders from all around the globe gathered here in Davos to tackle that question.

There's one more question looming over the Alps.

Is this the place to find the answer?

Only one leader of a G7 nation, Germany's Chancellor Olaf Scholz, was scheduled to attend.

2018, six of the seven did.

But as the cost of living continues to rise, global inequality continues to soar, and human development indicators are moving backwards for three years and counting, doubts are growing about the relevance of this elite gathering.

I asked Finland's former prime minister Alexander Stubb about all that and more.

Here's our conversation.

Alexander Stubb, thanks for joining me again on "GZERO World."

>> Thanks for having me.

>> So I want to start of course talking about Russia, Ukraine.

We saw literally just hours before Davos starts this year, yet another war crime committed by the Russian government.

Reaction to what we've seen in Dnipro, and the way the war's proceeding right now?

>> Yeah.

Well, I think the last time we talked, I was quite concerned about war fatigue hitting in with inflation, food price, energy price, and people just getting sick and tired of the war.

But it is clear that Putin has a knack of changing that just when it counts.

And unfortunately, he does it in a tragic, brutal way, by committing war crimes against civilians, as he did this time around.

And as long as he continues this, I think the support of the West and the rest of the world is going to be steadfast.

>> At what point, I mean, we continue to see all sorts of military equipment that's being provided by the West that frankly even several months ago wouldn't have been counted.

"It's too dangerous.

It could lead to a greater escalation."

What do you think is principally driving that at this point?

>> I think it's the wish that Ukraine wins this war.

And by a victory, I mean that we go back to the borders of 2014.

So, before the annexation of Crimea -- >> So, you mean Crimea as well?

>> Exactly.

I think that's kind of the only solution that we're looking at at the moment.

And in many ways, I wish Western leaders -- of course it's easier for me to say now, as an academic -- but Western leaders should use the Mario Draghi phrase from the Euro crisis, "Whatever it takes," which basically means that you need to provide all equipment possible because at the end of the day, if Putin gets away with the nuclear threats or whatever he's doing, he's just going to continue to do more of the same.

>> Now, I understand the argument that everything but Crimea, the territories taken since February 24th.

Crimea of course, historically -- and I don't mean like historically in the Soviet Union, I mean when Ukraine was independent -- was an autonomous region.

It was governed locally.

It had its own parliament that flew a tricolor that looked a lot like Russia.

Majority of Russians on the ground there.

Does that in any way change your view in how it should be handled, or do you think it actually needs to be taken militarily?

>> No.

I mean, the way in which I think about it is international rules and norms.

And of course, if you look at Ukrainian independence from 1991, that was when the borders were agreed.

And if you look at all UN charters, if you look at the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, Russia signed that charter in 1992, it's about territorial integrity... >> Integrity, yeah.

>> ...and sovereignty.

And Russia has violated that.

So if we believe in international law and international norms, it also means that Crimea is Ukrainian.

>> And so, Crimea would be returned to Ukraine, but would still be fully autonomous and self-governing under that strategy?

>> Most probably, that is the system that would then prevail.

>> So my question then is how does one effect that?

I understand that one would want that as an outcome that one would negotiate for.

You're suggesting, no, actually Ukraine needs to physically take that.

And now also keep in mind, at the time that it was taken illegally, annexed illegally by Russia, there was a Russian base -- there still is a Russian base in the Port of Sevastopol, a very important one.

Again, what does one do with those circumstances?

>> To be very frank, I think the only solution that we have here is a military solution, which basically means that Ukraine needs to push as far as it possibly can.

And then of course, I think at the end of the day, it also means regime change in Russia.

Is this going to be easy?

Is this going to be short term?

The answer to both of those questions is no.

>> Talk about the Finnish border.

Of course, you do have a very long and historically challenging border with Russia and the former Soviet Union.

Given how poorly the Russians have performed on the ground in the war in Ukraine, does that make you in any way a little less concerned, at least near term, about Finland's border security and national security?

>> Well, I think -- You know, if you have a 1,340-kilometer border with Russia, you always have to be concerned because as we can see, Russia is quite unpredictable.

I mean, one of the reasons that we have one of the largest standing armies in Europe, with over 900,000 men in reserve and 280,000 that can be mobilized in wartime, is not exactly because we want to defend ourselves against Sweden.

It is because there is a real Russian threat.

So never underestimate the capacity of Russia's to cause havoc.

So in that sense, I think you always have to be wary.

Now, Russia did used to have basically three things that they could threaten all of us with.

One was energy.

Well, that's almost gone.

>> That's gone.

>> One was the economy.

That's gone.

>> That's almost gone.

>> And one was military.

And we're sort of looking at it, well, you know, if you can't even take over Ukraine, why go anywhere else?

>> Talk a little bit about Russia's position globally.

You know, irrespective of the fact that the war continues to grind on, they have -- the Russians have lost an enormous amount in terms of geopolitical, geostrategic, and geoeconomic standing.

As we think longer term, beyond the fighting on the ground in Ukraine, how do we approach that reality?

>> Well, probably two answers.

One is to say that there is always a way in which great powers rise and fall.

And of course we saw the Soviet Union during the Cold War as a superpower and then falling but trying sort of to claw back power.

But now, it has basically fallen into oblivion.

I mean, in many ways, it's a rogue state.

There are some countries that are calling it a terrorist state.

The size of the Russian economy is less than 2% of world GDP.

So we're talking about the largest country in the world with the greatest natural resources, which basically hasn't been able to organize itself and now is isolating itself globally.

Of course it tries to have allies around, but I would argue that we are very much split.

So then we come to point number two, and that is what about the future?

I think what we need to look at in terms of European security is a total split.

44 European countries on one side, and Russia on the other.

Do we begin a conversation to bring them back now?

>> No.

>> No, we don't.

So we're looking at 5, 10, 15, even 20 years of Russian isolation.

As someone, you know, who is a neighbor to Russia and who has a lot of Russian friends, I find this a sad reality, but a reality, nevertheless.

>> Finally, talking about the WEF, right now, I mean, a little bit less focus on Ukraine, frankly, on the agenda and from the attendees, than we saw back in May when you and I were together.

How much does that concern you?

Also relevance, and how much can come out of the Forum on this issue?

>> I think we're looking at a lot of spillover effect from the war in Ukraine.

So, we're talking about globalization.

We're looking at trade.

A lot of people are afraid of protectionism.

We're looking at Chinese presence here, which is quite limited.

Only 16, the delegation.

We're looking at a rather prominent delegation from India.

So it's very much about, I guess, the theme of the whole Davos event.

You know, corporation... >> It's fragmentation, yeah.

>> ...in a fragmented world.

And I do think -- I mean, you and I talk about this a lot.

I think we need to start thinking about what is happening in a end of post-Cold War era.

And my argument is that I think the West needs to start becoming a little bit more humble and realize that they're not the main game in the show anymore.

>> Alex Stubb, always good to see you, my friend.

Thanks a lot.

>> Thanks.

♪♪ >> And now to my conversation with the new UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Volker Turk.

He took up his official functions as High Commissioner in October of 2022.

Volker Turk, good to see you in Davos.

>> Very nice to see you, Ian, in Davos.

>> So, you know, of course, congratulations on the new post.

You have plenty of things on your plate.

I'm gonna start with the most obvious, which is the Russian war in Ukraine.

Can you explain to our viewers what you see happening on the ground from a human rights perspective right now, and also what the UN is trying to do about it?

>> Yeah.

So, I was actually -- I visited Ukraine.

I was there beginning of December.

We have had an uninterrupted presence since 2014, so we have been able to really focus on human rights issues for, well, for quite some time.

I mean, I was struck by how much the civilians suffer.

And I don't think people imagine their suffering during winter.

I mean, we are in Davos.

It's very cold here.

Can you imagine if you have a blackout?

If you have no energy?

If you have no heating?

What this means for people?

And not just one day, but weeks on end.

And I mean, especially the impact on civilian infrastructure is incredible.

And these bombardments continue while I was there.

>> And the intention of the bombardments is specifically to end electricity for civilian populations.

>> Which is of course a huge issue on the international humanitarian law.

The other issue is -- And I had a chance to visit Bucha and Irpin, which is in the north.

It's one of these outskirts of Kyiv.

>> Which is where a lot of the war crimes were committed in the early days of the war.

>> Exactly.

>> As the Russians were forced to withdraw quickly.

>> Yes.

And what I could -- You know, my office has documented, and in fact when I was there, we issued a report about documented war crimes.

Willful killings.

Disappearances.

People being just shot at in the street.

So I mean, that's unfortunately the reality there.

And it's a horrible one.

And we absolutely need to make sure that, you know, reason comes back to the leadership in Russia to make sure that this war ends.

>> So, Russia recently rejected yet another call by the United Nations to end their illegal invasion of Ukraine.

They are of course a member of the Security Council, a permanent member, which, according to the UN Charter, has the principal obligation to uphold sovereignty in the world order.

Should they be removed from the Security Council?

And I understand it's an incredibly difficult thing to do, but in your view, do they have a role on the Security Council?

>> Well, I mean, the Security Council when it comes to Ukraine, is dysfunctional.

Let's put it that way.

And it's very clear.

Interestingly, the other big organ, the General Assembly, which consists of all 193 Member States, has actually seen a real revival because as a result, the General Assembly has been able to pass a number of resolutions on Ukraine.

And I think that's important because there are checks and balances within the institutional system to make sure that if on one issue it's not possible to find agreement, you can actually move in another context with the General Assembly on it.

Plus, of course, because you mentioned before, operationally, the UN at present is helping the Ukrainians on the humanitarian front, on the human rights front, on the development front.

And that is also the United Nations.

>> It is.

It is not the Security Council.

We have this ongoing problem.

>> And that is -- I mean, you know, it's not an issue...

I mean, it's going to be very difficult to find a way to make a Security Council functioning when one P5 is violating the Charter.

>> Since we're talking about human rights in the war, the Ukrainians still have to abide by international law when it comes to how they are engaging in the fighting.

Do they understand that?

And how is that playing out?

>> So, it was very important for me during my conversations with the Ukrainian government to make sure that there is appreciation for the application of international humanitarian law when it comes to warfare.

When you conduct hostilities, human rights law and international humanitarian law applies.

There's no way around it.

I mean, it's one thing when it comes to the international law side of the Charter and the violation of the Charter, but it's another thing if it comes to the -- if it comes to hostilities.

IHL applies to all parties.

To the war, to the conflict.

And that applies also to the Ukrainians.

>> And do you find that the Ukrainians are receptive to that message?

>> When I met with the Prosecutor General for example, he told me that they are investigating war crimes irrespective of who committed it.

>> Lots of other areas in the world where human rights are a massive challenge right now.

Treatment of Afghans, in particular of Afghan women, has been absolutely abominable since the Americans have left.

Talk a little bit about what the Afghans are facing on the ground.

And again, do you see any capacity for progress?

>> Over a year ago, when the Taliban took over, essentially, the government of the country, or de facto government of the country, there was some hope at the beginning that on a number of issues, we would find some progress and it would not be the Taliban that we know from the '90s.

And as we saw over the last couple of months, especially in December, one issue after another had become hugely controversial and appalling.

>> Can we say this is the same Taliban?

>> There is no country in the world that treats women in the way that Afghanistan does and the Taliban do.

I mean, no access to tertiary education.

No access to secondary education.

The fact that they are not allowing women to work anymore, even for fundamental humanitarian issues and for the NGOs, is a huge issue.

I mean, they chose -- It gives the picture of what we saw in the '90s.

>> Do I understand correctly that women can't work as doctors, but they also can't be seen by male doctors?

Is that true?

>> So for instance, when it comes to female doctors, because they need to treat other women, because it can't be a man who can treat a woman, they are allowed to work, as we understand it.

But we need to see how this is being implemented.

And I think at the moment, it's a very confused picture.

>> But it is at the farthest extreme of human repression that one can possibly imagine.

>> I think when it comes to -- If you look at all Member States of the United Nations and the treatment of women, Afghanistan is on the top of the list.

>> So what can possibly be done?

What can the international community do?

What can the United States do?

The Chinese?

I mean, they're -- This is not a powerful country.

>> There needs to be a unified stance that this is not part of the international order, the way you treat women.

Well, and then other human rights issues.

I mean, let's face it.

There are media issues, civic space issues, and so forth.

But in particular, the treatment of women is abominable.

>> Talking about forced labor, well, to the forced labor issue, of course, among the Uyghurs in China.

It's been a difficult one for the UN to work with.

Not just the UN, also multilateral organizations.

When you look at a country like China, when you look at a country like the United States, both of whom are critical supporters of the United Nations, how much does that make your job more challenging to do?

>> I mean, there are geopolitical tensions.

There's absolutely no doubt about that.

Human rights cannot be the collateral damage of these geopolitical tensions.

And it is my role as High Commissioner of Human Rights, with a global mandate, to ensure that I'm not part of any instrumentalization of anyone.

And that's the big challenge.

But I think so far, we have been successful.

>> Well, Volker Turk, I know that you have a busy schedule.

It was very nice to see you.

>> Very nice to see you, Ian.

♪♪ >> You never know who you're gonna meet wandering around in Davos, including Renée Fleming, who was honored this week by the Forum.

>> [ Operatic singing ] >> Opera legend Renée Fleming has won four Grammys and performed on six continents.

This week in Davos, she was presented with the prestigious Crystal Award not for her singing, but for the voice she's lending to help people understand how music impacts the human brain.

>> And one of the miracles of modern medicine in my lifetime is the development of scanning technology that has allowed us to see into the brain.

In fact, research shows that music activates nearly every region of the mapped brain.

What I've seen firsthand that has really convinced me is the effects of art therapies on especially disorders of aging.

So, Alzheimer's and dementia, Parkinson's, movement disorders, brain trauma.

It's huge with brain trauma for either veterans or for, you know, anyone who's had a horrible accident.

And then the other major pillar is childhood development.

So it makes a big difference in a child to have particularly instrumental training.

There's been a lot of research on that.

I would bet that of the leaders here, 3,000 people that are here at Davos, I would bet a huge percentage of them played an instrument as a child.

>> Through her foundation and a program called Music and the Mind, working with the National Institutes of Health, the NEA, and the Kennedy Center, Fleming is fueling research about how music therapy impacts people of all ages.

Are you really getting response from private and public sectors?

Is the healthcare industry taking it seriously?

>> They are now.

So, they're taking it seriously because there's a "there, there."

You know, five years ago when I started, people were sort of -- They thought, "Oh, that's nice," you know, "That's a really nice thing."

But now, I don't get that anymore from doctors and from medical professionals.

They understand that there is -- They've seen it.

The pandemic told us.

When it first happened and people -- Their response was to create, was to express through some sort of artistic way on their balconies and windows and on the roofs.

[ Crowd singing in native language, instruments playing ] For me, it was mind-body connection.

As a singer, I had stage fright.

I had pain as a sort of hedge against performance anxiety.

And so I felt it firsthand.

>> I'm so surprised to hear you say you had stage fright.

I've seen you perform many, many times.

I would say that has never quite come through.

>> Oh, some bad periods.

Yeah.

>> You know, another moment that I think really impacted particularly the classical world was Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

And I think of that iconic moment, seeing the Ukrainian flag unfurled across the Met.

>> Oh.

>> But it also created a lot of turmoil within the industry, right?

There are so many big Russian artists, like Anna Netrebko, for example.

>> Right.

Right.

>> And I'm just sort of curious what your impression of that moment was and sort of how, now a year into this conflict, the art world is dealing with it.

>> You know, it's so hard.

I mean, I think everyone is on the side of supporting Ukraine.

Everyone.

I mean, bar none.

Artists that did not speak out against Putin and against -- against Putin, really.

It's really him, you know?

Like Anna Netrebko have lost work, have lost audience.

I also feel sympathetic towards many of them because they have families at home.

They have -- They're kind of -- They can't go anywhere.

So I do think it's been a sad thing.

And certainly, young Russian artists who've been caught in the crosshairs who happened to already be studying in the U.S. or who are already playing, we hope to keep supporting them and making sure that everybody gets a chance to -- 'cause this will end.

And we have to think about the long-term future as well.

But everyone's support for the moment is 100% with Ukraine.

We want them to win.

We want them to survive and ideally as quickly as possible.

>> Renée Fleming, best of luck to you.

Congratulations on your award again, and thanks for doing this.

>> Thank you.

So wonderful.

♪♪ >> Vladimir Putin was not invited to this year's forum, but he has some thoughts about it.

He's gonna tell you.

Roll tape.

>> Hi.

It's me, Vladimir Putin, just enjoying wintry stroll through the forest of my isolation.

As you know, I was not invited to Davos this year.

Do I look upset about it?

I am not upset about it.

Do I look upset?

I am not upset.

Ha.

In fact, very few major world leaders are even there.

Joe Biden lost the invitation in a pile of classified documents.

Xi Jinping is at home trying to figure out how zero-COVID became one big headache.

And Emmanuel Macron is -- [ Scoffs ] Well, I said major world leaders.

[ Laughs ] Anyway, I don't need to be at Davos.

If I want to be in a snowy place with lots of empty slogans and crafty oligarchs, I will just stay in Russia.

>> "Puppet Regime"!

>> That's our show this week.

Come back next week and if you like what you see or you just want to see GZERO away from Davos, you can do that any other week when you check us out at gzeromedia.com.

♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ >> Major corporate funding provided by founding sponsor First Republic.

At First Republic, our clients come first.

Taking the time to listen helps us provide customized banking and wealth-management solutions.

More on our clients at firstrepublic.com.

Additional funding provided by... ...and by...