Return to Transcripts main page

Fareed Zakaria GPS

Nordic Nations' Sea Change On NATO; Iran's Foreign Minister On The Nuclear Deal; Interview With President Volodymyr Zelenskyy Of Ukraine; Interview With President Andrzej Duda Of Poland. Aired 10- 11a

Aired May 29, 2022 - 10:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[10:00:21]

FAREED ZAKARIA, CNN ANCHOR: This is GPS, the GLOBAL PUBLIC SQUARE. Welcome to all of you in the United States and around the world. I'm Fareed Zakaria coming to you from Davos, Switzerland.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ZAKARIA (voice-over): Today on the program, I talk with the leaders of four of Russia's neighbors to the West, starting with Ukraine's President Zelenskyy. I ask under what conditions he would be willing to negotiate with Vladimir Putin.

Then President Duda of Poland explains just how much suffering Russia has caused his nation in the past. And top ministers from Finland and Sweden tell me about their nations' historic decisions to apply for NATO membership.

Then, a rare interview with Iran's foreign minister at a critical time in talks for a revived nuclear deal.

ANTONY BLINKEN, SECRETARY OF STATE: To make sure that an Iran that is already acting with incredible aggression doesn't have a nuclear weapon or the ability to produce one on short notice.

ZAKARIA: Will they reach an agreement, or will the talks fall apart?

JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: When in God's name do we do what we all needs to be done?

ZAKARIA: Finally, one more senseless act of violence this time in Texas. I'll give you some of my thoughts on how to end this endless carnage.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ZAKARIA: But first, here's "My Take." The World Economic Forum in Davos is usually fixated on the future. Most years the attendees are dazzled by some country, company, or technology promising to burst forward, force change, dominate the next decade.

This year the focus was not on the future but the past. People delved back into history to debate what caused Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

The Swedish finance minister explained why his country, which hasn't been at war since the Napoleonic Wars, was breaking its 200-year tradition of neutrality with its bid to join NATO.

The Finnish foreign minister recalled Finland's resistance to Moscow's aggression in the Winter War of 1939 and 1940.

In past years at Davos, companies took storefronts and plastered them with jubilant signs cheering on dynamism, acceleration, and disruption. This time there were far fewer placards and slogans, some of them meekly promising sustainability or progress on climate change.

The one genuinely cheerful sign I saw said, "Will the Saudi GDP now be fueled by YOLO, FOMO, and WYWH?" With oil at over $100 a barrel, the Saudi regime has much to be excited about.

The storefront that dominated attention was one that used to be booked for years by Russians who hosted lavish cocktail parties and caviar tastings there with the country's money de lite.

Now it has a sign in the window that reads in small, clear type, "This used to be the Russian house in Davos, now it's the Russian war crimes house in Davos."

Sponsored by the Ukrainian businessman, Victor Pinchuk, the rooms are filled with striking images and stories of Russia's barbaric actions in its campaign against Ukraine.

Ukraine dominated Davos this year, and most people I spoke to were quite unsure how this war would end. That played into a larger sense of uncertainty about the world that we are heading into, a world of multiplying risks.

Tharman Shanmugaratnam, Singapore's senior minister, said to me we know the risks that are out there are large. They're not about black swan events coming out of the blue.

A pandemic was predicted. Russia's invasion was a known possibility. Another pandemic or more frequent climate crises, these are not just possible but likely.

We can't keep expecting and planning for a return to calm on troubled times.

A former central banker told me that economic policymakers felt that they were in uncharted territory. The old model, when inflation moves up ever so slightly and then you raise rates a tiny bit and all was well, that's dead. We're in a new world and we're all just experimenting.

There is a broader foreboding, a sense that the era we have just lived through, the three decades since 1990 may have been an unusual, perhaps even unique one in which great power politics and geopolitical tensions that normally dominate and define international life were absent. [10:05:06]

The giddy trends of recent times, globalization, the information revolution, even democratization were trends built on an edifice of power, America's super power status.

But that strength has been waning for some years, caused by Iraq, the global financial crisis, COVID. Now it is being challenged first by China and then Russia.

In all this gloom, there's one distinctly hopeful sign, Europe is acting with a greater sense of unity and purpose than I've ever seen before.

Every European leader I spoke with believed that Russia's aggression had sparked a revolution of sorts across the continent.

The E.U. has shown remarkable unity on sanctions and is slowly but steadily coming together on energy policy.

These successes could evolve into greater coordination on foreign and even defense policy. Europeans have realized that at a fundamental level that they were taking peace and stability for granted, that it might now have to be created and sustained by hard work and commitment, in part, by building hard power of their own and deploying it strategically.

There are serious debates about ending the slow consensual process of E.U. decision-making that allows one country like Hungary to veto its efforts.

The most lasting legacy of this crisis could be a new role for Europe as a more purposeful, strategic actor on the world stage.

But for that to happen, this experience in uniting against Russia has to work, only success can breed more success. Failure will doom this experiment.

The founding fathers of the European Union like Robert Schuman and Jean Monnet were steeped in history and determined to ensure that war did not break out again in Europe.

Today's statesmen need to infuse their day-to-day decisions with a similar sense of history.

50 years from now, no one will remember whether growth slowed on the continent for a couple of quarters in 2022 or if Brussels had to pay extra for natural gas from the U.S.

What they will recall is the answer to one question. Who won the war in Ukraine? Putin or the West?

Go to CNN.com/Fareed for a link to my "Washington Post" column this week. And let us get started.

Here in Davos, I had the opportunity to talk to the most important world leader who wasn't here, Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

The interview was part of an event organized by the Victor Pinchuk Foundation which focuses most of its efforts on its home country of Ukraine.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ZAKARIA: Mr. President, a pleasure, once again, to talk to you.

PRES. VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY, UKRAINE (through translator): Yes. Likewise. Glad to see you.

ZAKARIA: Let me begin by asking you, you know, in 1942 Churchill said this is not the end, this is not the beginning of the end, but this may be the end of the beginning.

And what he was trying to steal everyone for was the idea that this was a long war, and he turned out to be right.

Where do you think we are in this conflict between Russia and Ukraine and really Russia and the world?

ZELENSKYY (through translator): Thank you for this question. As far as our war is concerned, the all-out war of the Russian federation against Ukraine, you know, Ukraine is fighting for its independence and freedom.

It has been doing so for years, for decades and centuries and even longer. And I think that today we are speaking about the war for independence, for freedom of the European continent.

Europe whole and united. And we are speaking about the beginning of the peaceful and united Ukraine as well.

As far as my guess when this war might end, that would depend on several things, very specific things.

First of all, they will end the desire of the united West to stay united in supporting Ukraine with weapons, with finance to boost our resilience and political will not to be afraid but fight against the Russian federation.

In this hybrid war not with boots on the ground, of course, but in various other alternative ways.

And it also hinges on the desire of the Russian federation. This war will be over sooner or later. I'm sure there would be some sort of a peaceful process, some sort of talks.

[10:10:07]

And we would be discussing the issues of who Ukraine is going to negotiate with, with what president of the Russian federation that we are going to negotiate with. I hope that would be a different president in the Russian federation. Thank you.

ZAKARIA: Do you believe it is impossible at this point to negotiate with Vladimir Putin an end to this conflict?

ZELENSKYY (through translator): (INAUDIBLE), I think that the incumbent president of the Russian federation does not fully understand what's going on.

He is not keenly aware of what's going on in Ukraine. Ukraine is not going to concede our territory. We are fighting in our country on our land.

So I think that the president of the Russian federation should be actually shoved into the reality of today, not being in this bubble and this alternate reality of his that he has been building for quite a long time.

And he is still in this world of propaganda in the Russian federation. So I can only talk with the president directly with no intermediaries, no brokers.

Once the president is prepared to leave his bubble of this alternative reality into the real world and talk to us, understand that a lot of people are being killed, including civilians, perhaps then will he understand that we should start talking and should put the end to this war that he launched, his country is waging against us.

And perhaps then we will be able to talk unless it is too light to find some diplomatic way off, a way out of this situation.

ZAKARIA: You talked about Ukraine fighting until its territories are recovered, Mr. President. Do you refer in that situation to territories last this year? Or will Ukraine fight until it recovers the territories it lost in 2014?

ZELENSKYY (through translator): You know, when Ukraine says that it will be fighting to regain its territories, it means that Ukraine will be fighting until it gains all its territory back.

So it doesn't mean anything else. It's about our sovereignty, about our territorial integrity, it's about our independence.

ZAKARIA: Would it be fair to say, Mr. President -- and I think you are implying this by what you've said, so far, the Russians are not negotiating seriously at all on any of these issues.

ZELENSKYY (through translator): Yes, you can say so. That would be fair to say. I can't see their willingness, nor can I see any practicality in what we are talking about.

At the beginnings there was an impression that we can move ahead. There would be a certain result or some outcome of those talks. But it all has stalled.

ZAKARIA: Mr. President, what do you need from the world? The United States has voted about $50 billion worth of arms. Do you have what you need? What more do you need?

ZELENSKYY (through translator): Just the confidence of the world that they can do it. The world should be united. Europe, the world at large should be united.

We are as strong as you are united. We understand that technically weapon-wise, Russia is still prevailing.

They outnumber us, they outgun us. And what we need is weapons, of course. And we need to be much more powerful.

We should have much greater firepower than the Russians, not by several units, but by time. Our huge benefit and our huge advantage over Russia would be when we are truly united, when every country is dead sure what side it is on.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ZAKARIA: Next on GPS, I'll talk to the president of Poland, Ukraine's neighbor to the northwest. Even as Warsaw offers great assistance to Kyiv, it looks wearily at Moscow.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:19:10]

ZAKARIA: Poland threw off the yolk of communism in 1989 after nearly half a century in the Soviet sphere of influence. It has now been a NATO member for 23 years and today it's critical to Ukraine's ability to continue to fight against Russia.

Among other help, Poland has taken in the lion's share of refugees from its neighbor to the southeast. And it acts as a way point for Western weapons and aid to Ukraine.

I've been waiting to speak to Polish President Andrzej Duda for years. I got my chance this week in Davos.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ZAKARIA: President Duda, pleasure to have you on, sir.

ANDRZEJ DUDA, POLISH PRESIDENT (through translator): Thank you very much. Thank you for inviting me.

ZAKARIA: Let me ask you right away, there are currently proposals being put in Europe to the Russian government, as far as we understand, an Italian proposal, that offers a kind of settlement, which says Ukraine will be neutral, Crimea and Donbas will essentially stay with Russia, and that we can have a resumption of normal relations, in a sense a kind of negotiated settlement to the end of the war.

[10:20:18]

What is your view about that?

DUDA (through translator): As I understand it, the rule is very simple. There can be no such agreement which would lead to a peaceful settlement of the situation that we are faced with in Ukraine today because Russia attacked Ukraine without any justification, completely without any reason, because all the information about some kind of alleged Nazism in Ukraine, this is just Russian propaganda. It has nothing to do with reality.

That was a brutal aggression. It is a brutal war which is being raged by Russia against Ukraine, against a sovereign and independent state.

Russia wants to expand its sphere of influence. It's as simple as that. It wants to force Ukraine to be subjected to it. This is the only reason.

And we cannot accept the fact that in a free and democratic world, an agreement which would be supposed to put an end to this war could happen without the participation of Ukraine and without the agreement of Ukraine.

If this war is to come to an end, it has to come to an end upon such conditions which Ukraine will agree sitting at the negotiations table.

Let me repeat once again, sitting at the negotiating table. Nothing can happen above the heads of Ukrainian authorities, nothing can happen above the Ukrainian people.

It has to take place with their participation, and such conditions must be taken and agreed on which they accept.

To me, this is a precondition, the basic condition. And only then can we talk about peace, which has been worked out in an honest way and which can be stable peace.

ZAKARIA: A former leader in Poland once said, step one for the Russians is Georgia, step two is Ukraine, step three is Poland. Do you and Poland feel a real threat from Russia?

DUDA (through translator): So there is no doubt whatsoever that Polish society is afraid of Russia. We have got some historical experiences.

Sometimes I'm asked to give them a brief account of Polish history.

Say the truth, if we look at the Polish history, the recent period that we have seen is very few and far between when we have enjoyed peace in Poland, dozens of years of peace.

However, our history extends over 1,000 years of history with Germany and for a hundred years of war with Russia.

We also had partitions in Poland. Poland did not exist on the map for 123 years. A large piece of Poland is occupied by the terrorist Russia then we were invaded by the Soviet in 1920, then again Russia invaded us along with Nazi Germany in September in 1939.

And this was the start of the Second World War precisely.

Polish officers were murdered in 1940 in Katyn where Russians murdered, shooting in the back of their heads, 12,000 Polish officers, whom they took as prisoners of war in breach of all conventions. This is our history.

Then we remained in the Russian sphere of influence. We were behind the iron curtain. So that is a tragic history. All Polish people know it perfectly well, and Polish are afraid.

They do not want to find themselves in the Russian sphere of influence.

Today the Poles are ready to sacrifice a lot from their welfare in order to strengthen our armed forces. We have adopted a new bill.

Not only are we increasing defense spending to the level of more than 2 percent of GDP, according to NATO standards. But next year we are going to raise them to the level of 3 percent of GDP.

And the following years we're going to go above that threshold our army to 250,000 professional soldiers and 50,000 soldiers of territorial defense force volunteers, in other words.

So we want also to strengthen the infrastructure of our armed forces, that is why we are making huge purchases. Of course we are delighted today, and people in Poland can have a good night's sleep.

We're happy that today 10,000 U.S. Army soldiers today are stationed in Poland protecting our land also, under the guarantees of Article 5 of the North Atlantic treaty.

That's very good. But we want to strengthen our armed forces to make sure that the U.S. armed forces are only an auxiliary force, only act as a guarantor.

That's really what we want to do is defend ourselves and I do believe that in the years to come in the near future, also thanks to the heroes of the Ukrainians who have put up such a fierce resistance against Russians.

Russians are breaking their teeth there as we say. I hope thanks to that we will have time to strengthen our armed forces over the next couple of years so that it does not pay off to attack us because we are a brave nation. We have got very valiant soldiers.

I believe they are equally brave as Ukrainian soldiers. Russians know that. And I believe that when we are stronger, they will be afraid to attack us.

[10:25:05]

ZAKARIA: You and your government have taken a very tough stance against the Russians and in favor of the Ukrainians. You are facing enormous cost as a result of all this, probably the most outside of the Ukrainians.

Poland, as you said, has taken two million people. My understanding is there are no refugee camps. These two million people, Ukrainians, are being housed individually almost, for the most part, by Polish citizens in their houses. Do you worry that at some point this cost will become too large for

Poland? Because this conflict seems like it's going to go on for a while.

DUDA (through translator): I'm very grateful to my compatriots for their behavior, for their stance because indeed they opened up their hearts and they opened up their homes.

And literally they took more than two million people into their homes, mainly women and children.

To me, it was really amazing, and I'm really moved by this. I could tell the Ukrainian men who are fighting on the frontlines today, I could tell them, listen, your women and children are safe in Poland, don't worry, nothing will happen to them, so you can fight with Russia.

I think that is extremely important every man has a sense of that.

ZAKARIA: President Duda, pleasure to have you on.

DUDA (through translator): Thank you very much.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ZAKARIA: Coming up in a moment on GPS, I'll talk to top officials from Sweden and Finland. Both applied for membership in NATO last week seeking to increase their own security, but also risking becoming Russia's next targets.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:31:04]

ZAKARIA: Last weekend, Russia turned off the tap, halting natural gas exports to Finland. This came just days after Finland and its Nordic neighbor Sweden officially applied for membership to NATO. At the World Economic Forum in Davos this week, I talked to Finland's Foreign Minister Pekka Haavisto and Sweden's Finance Minister Mikael Damberg about those paradigm-shifting decisions.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ZAKARIA: Sweden has been neutral for 200 years, maybe more. This is a big deal. Give us a sense of, do Swedes think of it in those historical terms, this is a break with centuries of neutrality?

MIKAEL DAMBERG, SWEDISH FINANCE MINISTER: I think you have to understand that Sweden has been non-aligned for 200 years. Last time we were at war was the Napoleon Wars. That brings some perspectives to it. So no ordinary family in Sweden has experienced war themselves. They might have contacts with Finland, with other countries. People have fled to Sweden with experience in war, but Sweden itself has not experienced war.

So for us the non-aligned politics has been very pragmatic. It's been a way of not getting involved in wars. So for us changing this policy is quite big. It's a huge thing. It's generational Swedes that have grown up, it has not been the same for 200 years but still basically had a political position not getting involved and being non-aligned. So -- but it has changed.

The last couple of decades we joined the European Union, we have a broad corporation not least with Finland, our closest ally but also a very strong partnership with NATO. So, of course, this has changed over the years but this is a big historic event for Sweden.

ZAKARIA: And for you this Russian aggression tells you you're in a new world, you're in a new security environment.

DAMBERG: Yes, totally a new world. And also we think it's a long-term change. It's not just the war right now.

This is a new Russia. This is a new environment. So, for many Swedes, I think this really brought the debate to a different level.

So we had a debate in Sweden, but it was quite cautious, it was quite respectful. You could have different opinion. But, in the end, most people, the population, but most political parties agreed this was the time to see that we are more secure within NATO than outside NATO. And we want to go hand in hand with Finland.

ZAKARIA: From Finland's point of view, you also have a long history here, and it's been one where you've been very careful not to provoke the Russians because you share that border. In a way you're almost a suburb of St. Petersburg. What made you change?

PEKKA HAAVISTO, FINNISH FOREIGN MINISTER: Well, of course we have 1,300 kilometer common border and we want to maintain that border peaceful. And how we in Finland think about Russia is long perspective also. We look 100 years backwards and 100 years forward. And then we look towards the future, we don't know what's coming after Putin. Is it something better, more Democratic, or is it something worse? And we have to be prepared for all different scenarios of Russia.

ZAKARIA: Russia's immediate reaction was to threaten you and then to cut off energy. Do you worry that there will be more Russian actions?

HAAVISTO: Our feeling is that, yes, Russia did not like the idea that there is enlargement of NATO and particularly that NATO is coming closer with the Finnish border, Finnish-Russian border and so forth. They are critical comments on that. But, at the same time, my understanding is that it didn't trigger any military action against Finland or Sweden. It might trigger something on cyber space or on hybrid format and so forth.

[10:35:05]

But, of course, we have been all the time saying that we are not provoking, we want to keep the border peaceful. We want to keep the bilateral corporation what is needed even in these circumstances on the border, on the professional basis. ZAKARIA: One big unpredictable element of this could be that Russia invades Finland. Do you think that's a serious prospect? And are you prepared?

HAAVISTO: We have always, of course, throughout our history been prepared for that. We have been prepared for the military action. We have been prepared for violation of our air space, our land, our territory. We have been prepared for cyber and hybrid threats and so forth. And that has been -- that's in our DNA. And that's a part of our defense mentally, whoever wants to try to harm us will face the consequences from our side.

ZAKARIA: Ministers, thank you so much. Pleasure to have this conversation.

HAAVISTO: Thank you.

ZAKARIA: Thank you.

ZAKARIA: Thank you.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ZAKARIA: Next on GPS, tensions over Ukraine boiled over into war. Is Iran the next site of international hostilities? I will talk to that nation's foreign minister when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:40:27]

ZAKARIA: While the world has been watching Ukraine, another global hot spot has been simmering, Iran. That nation could have enough fissile material for a nuclear weapon in a matter of weeks, according to top officials in the United States and Israel. And on Wednesday the U.S.' special envoy for Iran said the odds are against a nuclear deal being agreed to with the Islamic republic. I had a rare chance to talk to Iran's Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian on Thursday.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ZAKARIA: Let me ask you about the so-called Iran nuclear deal, the JCPOA. Rob Malley, the American official who is in charge of handling that portfolio, said recently that the prospects for the deal being renewed are tenuous at best, fragile, cast doubt that it would happen. Do you share that view that the Iran nuclear deal is unlikely to come back into force?

HOSSEIN AMIR-ABDOLLAHIAN, IRANIAN FOREIGN MINISTER (through translator): Just like the foreign minister of the United States, the foreign secretary and also Mr. Rob Malley, I am facing a lot of pressure coming from my parliament. They are a strong people inside both countries that are against the revival of JCPOA for their own reasons. Of course, we are receiving messages from Rob Malley and some of the officials of the United States at the highest level, Mr. Biden himself, that are a little bit different from what we hear from the public statements that they make.

We think that Mr. Biden is facing some kind of inaction. I hope that the American side will act and behave realistically. The subject is important to us. The most important thing is that in the return of all the parties to JCPOA, we need to -- we need to benefit from the economic gains of JCPOA. The elements of the Trump's maximum pressure policy should be removed.

This is something that Mr. Biden said from the very beginning of his presidential campaign. We cannot return to JCPOA but at the same time Iran will be deprived of its economic gains. We cannot return to JCPOA but the elements and the factories of Trump's maximum pressure policy are still there. Mr. Biden has to choose one of these.

ZAKARIA: Let me ask you about what is reported to be the central issue that is the obstacle now, the designation of the IRGC as a terrorist organization, the Iranian republican guards. It seems to me, from the outside, that this is an issue outside of the nuclear deal. In other words, there are things that Iran or the revolutionary guard have done, which are -- which have triggered this designation, rightly or wrongly, but they have nothing to do with the Iran nuclear deal. So why allow the issue of the revolutionary guard to interfere with whether or not you go ahead with the deal?

AMIR-ABDOLLAHIAN (through translator): As a person who is responsible for our diplomacy team and negotiating team, honestly, what is the hurdle, what has caused the pause or should I say -- or a cessation in the talks is that economic guarantees, we have not come to the point where we can trust the American side.

ZAKARIA: So my understanding is that whether or not the revolutionary guard are designated as foreign terrorist organization makes no difference practically. Iran is, in any case, under sanctions and has been from the United States from the 1980s. There is no additional sanction that comes with that. There is no additional curtailment of activity. It's a purely symbolic issue. So why would you let that distract you from whether or not you can get back into the deal? Is that a fair way to think about it?

AMIR-ABDOLLAHIAN (through translator): I think, first of all, the Americans know very well that if they want to return to JCPOA, what is it that they need to do.

[10:45:03]

They know very well, full well what it is required from them. President Biden knows very well, understands very well.

ZAKARIA: But tell us in case he doesn't understand. What does it -- what does it require? Just the economic --

AMIR-ABDOLLAHIAN (through translator): He knows very well what he should do. The most important thing is that the economic sanctions need to be lifted in an effective way. The most important thing is that the maximum pressure policy of the Trump era, the factors, the elements there, need to be removed. We are not asking for much. But reducing these fundamental things to just one subject and focusing on it I think -- I think this is not a good behavior. This is not a good reaction. The Americans know very well what the realities are, what is happening on the ground, and what they should do.

We have kept a window of diplomacy open. And in order to reach a good and lasting deal, we are determined, we are serious about it. And it has been us, the Iranian side, that has put initiatives on the table and helped the window of diplomacy open.

But let me be frank with you. We have intelligence that the Zionist -- the Zionist regime, they have taken the foreign policy of the U.S. hostage, the interest of the U.S. hostage. Mr. Biden should make the decision, does he really want to kill the time, waste the time, or does he want to be brave and stay true to the commitments, obligations of the United States under JCPOA?

We have been the most serious and most honest, and we have done the most accurate things. But now it is the United States that has to make the decision. And I think if the Zionist lobby distances itself from the national interests of the U.S., just a little, Mr. Biden will be able to make the decision required for reaching a good deal. But if it doesn't happen, you know, in Iran in the last 40 years, we have withstood these pressures, and we have other options on the table as well.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ZAKARIA: When we come back, I'll bring you the most poignant part of my interview with Ukraine's President Zelenskyy. He made a point to express his sorrow over the terrible school shooting in Texas. I will also give you my thoughts on that tragedy, when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:52:41]

ZAKARIA: And now for the "Last Look." When President Zelenskyy spoke to me at Davos, he took time out from worrying about the many tragedies all around him to talk about a tragedy in the United States.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PRESIDENT VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY, UKRAINE (through translator): First of all, I would like to express my condolences to all of the relatives and family members of the children who were killed in an awful shooting in Texas at a school in the USA. This is terrible to have victims of shooters in peaceful time. So if you ask me about my opinion about the protection of the war, it happens everywhere. It happens in the world. It happens within seemingly peaceful societies.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ZAKARIA: For me, the most gut-wrenching aspect of this shooting, as well as all the others, is that what needs to be done is so blindingly obvious. Let me make some points about it that I have made 10 years ago after the Newtown massacre. The most important fact to know about America's gun violence is that it is off the charts compared to any other advanced country in the world.

According to estimates by the University of Washington, we have eight times the rate of gun homicides compared to Canada, 50 times compared to Germany, 100 times compared to the U.K., and a staggering 250 times compared to Japan.

So when people talk about the mental state of the shooter, just keep asking yourself about those numbers. Do we have 50 times the rate of mentally disturbed people as Germany? Or is our level of violence in movies and video games 250 times more than that watched and consumed in Japan? Obviously not.

So what explains our exceptional rates of gun killings? Well, there is one area where we are exceptional, the number of guns that are easily available in America. With 4 percent of the world's population, we have almost 50 percent of the world's guns. There are more guns in people's possession than there are people in the United States. It's easy for an 18-year-old in Texas to buy AR-15 style rifles whose designed purpose is to kill human beings with deadly speed.

[10:55:08]

Gun control works. Japan, Germany, Britain, and Canada all very different countries and cultures, but they have one common thread, strong gun control laws, and that has one common result, low gun violence.

Ten years ago I mentioned an incident that took place in China that's also worth repeating. Just hours before the Newtown shootings, a mentally disturbed man entered a school in China's Henan province. He tried to kill as many children as he could. He injured many, but he did not kill a single one because the only weapon he could get his hands on was a knife.

I will keep saying this. We know what would work. There has rarely been so much evidence pointing in one direction if all of us were just willing to open our eyes.

Thanks to all of you for being part of my special program this week from Davos. I will see you next week.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)