Yeah

... uh, and credibility is a serious problem because on the face of it, it's hard, uh, to discern, is this a lie or is it reality and the truth? Uh, it seems to be the same, uh, outwardly, but of course, uh, the one is the truth, the other is the lie.

And of course, uh, the authoritarian, um, adversaries, uh, of the idea of democracy and freedom and of, uh, states run by these ideas, they are attacking us also by using these new instruments, uh, of artificial intelligence and by undermining the integrity, uh, of our public communication.

And this on the, on, means that on the one side it's absolutely clear, freedom is what our societies and states are built upon.

So freedom of speech is absolutely inte- integral, and we can have the self-confidence not to be lectured by authoritarian dictators about the value of freedom of speech and by not anybody else.

So we are granting it.

It is in our constitution, and it is in our, in our, it is a, it's, it's in our foundation of a democracy and a society.

... of burden-sharing, i-is being addressed in a very aggressive way at this point.

And the defensive case, I think that's the problem Keir Starmer has had, is harder to make.

I can, of course, I am free to discuss the foreign policy of both European partner countries and, and leaders, and I would not approve of, uh, neither of the way the both have acted.

So firstly, the, the, the international law.

We discussed the aspect of international law.

I think it's, it's a dilemma, and I would not accept that there is one right way to act, uh, compliant with international law because you have to weigh the consequences, and you have to see what it means.

An asymmetry of the ones whoFollow, uh, the immediate imperative of international law, and then you have the countries who, uh, uh, ha-have complete disregard for international law, like Russia, like Iran, like North Korea, and also China, because China is only in favor of international law when it suits its interest.

So this, and we are in a very specific period of history where, where a new order is going to evolve, uh, and w-we have to take into consideration what that would mean.

Again, another potential knock-on is that in the aim of trying to do the right thing in this moral maze, that you end up actually in a situation where you make things worse foreseeably for citizens and that they take a dim view of this.