0:00

This BBC podcast is

0:02

supported by ads outside

0:04

the UK. Ranked number Frank

0:06

to in innovation, 10 consecutive years.

0:09

Arizona State University isn't just ahead

0:11

of the curve. It's creating new

0:13

paths to success. paths Learn from notable

0:15

clinical and research faculty and research That's

0:17

a degree better. Explore programs at

0:19

Explore programs at a .edu. Online,

0:22

that's a degree better. Explore

0:24

programs at ASU, ASU, ASU,

0:26

E, EDU. The UN's office for

0:28

the coordination of humanitarian affairs,

0:31

or Ochre, received $33 billion

0:33

in funding last year, helping

0:35

almost 200 million people in

0:37

crisis around the world. Over

0:40

40% of that money came from

0:42

the United States. Ochre had hoped

0:44

to raise nearly $50 billion this

0:46

year, but President Trump has

0:48

pulled almost all American foreign aid.

0:50

My guest in an interview recorded

0:53

on February 12th is Tom Fletcher,

0:55

the new head of Och. which

0:57

makes him one of the most

0:59

powerful aid workers in the world. What

1:01

does the US decision mean for his

1:03

work? And what does it mean for the

1:05

decades-old system of rich countries

1:08

helping poorer ones? Tom Fletcher,

1:10

welcome to Hard Talk. Thank you

1:12

for having you, Sarah. What fact has

1:14

the US aid funding decision had on

1:16

what you do? Well, it's great

1:18

anxiety across the whole humanitarian system.

1:20

Of course, this isn't just the

1:22

United Nations and the humanitarian agencies

1:24

that I coordinate. It's NGOs, it's

1:26

frontline workers, it's the communities. Most

1:28

importantly, it's the people we're here

1:30

to serve, the people whose lives

1:32

we're here to save. So there

1:34

is anxiety. Clearly, we're waiting at

1:37

the moment. We're in this review

1:39

phase. And we'll see to what

1:41

extent the cuts. Transpire you know

1:43

that's that that's where we are

1:45

in the process right now. Okay, but

1:47

the immediate thing was to freeze all

1:49

funding and then Secretary of State Marco

1:51

Rubio said I issued a blanket waiver

1:53

that said if this is a life-saving

1:55

program if it's providing food or

1:57

medicine or anything that is saving

1:59

lives you're not included in the free.

2:02

So what do you understand by that?

2:04

What would you understand? Well, that's welcome

2:06

clarification, because of course most of what

2:08

we do, we would put in that

2:11

category. You know, it's the food that

2:13

the World Food Program distribute. It's the

2:15

life-saving work that UNICEF do. to support

2:17

the world's children. It's the support that

2:20

the World Health Organization do to keep

2:22

people alive in health centers, support to

2:24

refugees. You know, this work, the core

2:27

of what we do is that life-saving

2:29

work. Okay, but you have been to

2:31

the US and you have argued, I

2:33

imagine, for it to continue. Do they

2:36

accept what you consider life-saving? to be

2:38

life-saving. Well, let's see. I mean, that's

2:40

where we are. We're in a conversation

2:42

at the moment. We're putting, you know,

2:45

as humanitarian organizations and NGOs across the

2:47

sector, across the humanitarian community, we're putting

2:49

in requests for waivers for the most

2:52

essential work, and we're having that debate.

2:54

Have you had anything accepted? Yes. There

2:56

have been waivers already four parts of

2:58

that life-saving work. It's very early days.

3:01

The administration is new. Let me be

3:03

clear, I think we should be more

3:05

efficient, I think we should be more

3:07

innovative, I think actually we should make

3:10

savings, we should reduce the duplication and

3:12

the bureaucracy, anything that gets in the

3:14

way of us saving lives, actually I

3:17

welcome that debate. And you know, let's

3:19

be clear as well, governments have a

3:21

right to demand that UN agencies, that

3:23

NGOs spend their taxpayers' money. wisely. We've

3:26

got to make a stronger effort to

3:28

bring populations with us, to bring voters

3:30

with us, if we're going to sustain

3:32

this level of funding which the world

3:35

needs right now. Right. And what the

3:37

US has said is the administration, what

3:39

it objects to, is any project supporting

3:42

diversity and inclusion, transgender rights, family planning,

3:44

abortion access, and of course any wasteful

3:46

spending. On those first issues, are those

3:48

things that OCHA covers? major programs. I

3:51

mean, let's be clear, diversity is a

3:53

very very good thing. I want an

3:55

organization that is diverse. I have a

3:57

fantastic group of people working for me

4:00

from all over the world and that

4:02

diversity makes us stronger. I want to

4:04

work for quality. I want to work

4:07

for inclusion. That is being spent on

4:09

diversity programs. Tiny, tiny proportion of what

4:11

OCHA does. Of course we've got... big

4:13

UN agencies doing very, very vital work

4:16

in those fields. And I imagine that

4:18

those are the ones that the US

4:20

is most focused on. I hope that

4:22

those organizations will get sustained funding to

4:25

do their important work. But I've just

4:27

come back from Gaza, where the needs

4:29

are massive. And what we're doing there

4:32

is getting 800 trucks a day into

4:34

Gaza. We've fed a million people in

4:36

the three weeks since the ceasefire. We're

4:38

getting health centers opened up. You know,

4:41

80,000 tents have gone in so that

4:43

people can start to rebuild their lives.

4:45

That's life-saving work. I want to come

4:47

back to Gaza in a moment, but

4:50

I want to just stay on the

4:52

principle, because there were examples used, two

4:54

million dollars for gender activities in Guatemala.

4:57

This is not an ocher. project for

4:59

activity strengthen transled organisations in Guatemala, one

5:01

and a half million to Serbia for

5:03

gender inclusion. Are these projects that you

5:06

would say that's giving aid a bad

5:08

name? So those are projects which donors

5:10

are very willing to fund and support,

5:12

otherwise the agencies wouldn't be spending the

5:15

money in that way. But you know,

5:17

you're talking about... You're talking about tiny,

5:19

tiny digit millions there amongst our campaign

5:22

this year for 47 billion dollars to

5:24

save 190 million lives to get life-saving

5:26

support to that number of people. So

5:28

I don't think we should skew the

5:31

whole conversation to there. It should be

5:33

about how do we save as many

5:35

lives as possible? So go on. So

5:37

of the 14 billion. How much do

5:40

you have some sense of what you're

5:42

going to lose that comes from the

5:44

United States? Well, the US funds over

5:47

40% of our big appeals right now.

5:49

And so, you know, the US has

5:51

been a humanitarian superpower. Let's be honest.

5:53

Over decades now, they've been our number.

5:56

number one donor to the humanitarian response

5:58

globally. So we've helped hundreds of millions

6:00

of people over decades because of that

6:02

support coming in and clearly not all

6:05

of that money is going to come

6:07

in the future and so we won't

6:09

reach as many people. But it all

6:12

depends on what we get exemptions for,

6:14

what the US agrees to continue funding

6:16

and as you say Secretary Rubio has

6:18

put the emphasis on that essential life-saving

6:21

work and that's exactly where we want

6:23

to put it. Have lives been lost

6:25

already as a result of the decision?

6:27

Programs being cut by NGOs. There are

6:30

programs being cut across UN agencies at

6:32

the moment. In the frontline work that

6:34

we're doing, you know, I've been in

6:37

Darfur, I've been in Gaza, I've been

6:39

in Kupianzk on the front lines of

6:41

the Ukraine-Russia war, I was in Damascus

6:43

just after the change of raging, those

6:46

programs, the surge in aid that we're

6:48

carrying out there is continuing. And in

6:50

Gaza in particular, that money is coming

6:52

through. No lives have been lost. Well,

6:55

clearly, if you lose billions of dollars

6:57

in funding, then you're not going to

6:59

be able to reach as many people

7:02

as we would wish to. But we're

7:04

already in a massive funding crisis. Last

7:06

year, our campaigns were under half funded.

7:08

And even in the best case scenario,

7:11

I'm not going to raise the 47

7:13

billion I need. It's not just America.

7:15

The cuts are coming for everything. And

7:17

you're making judgments every day brutal, brutal

7:20

judgments about prioritizing things. But here's one

7:22

that you say... is about life-saving work.

7:24

In the worst case scenario, how many

7:27

lives are you talking about? It's impossible

7:29

to estimate at this time. Those choices

7:31

are brutal. So our estimate is we

7:33

need to reach over 300 million people

7:36

in the coming year. And we've already

7:38

made the very, very tough, brutal choice,

7:40

as you say, to reduce that number

7:42

to 190 million that we could reach.

7:45

if we raise 47 billion dollars. And

7:47

I'm sorry, these numbers just seem huge

7:49

and crazy and they're hard to picture,

7:52

but behind those numbers are 190 million

7:54

people that we seek to reach with

7:56

our life-saving support. Now within that, if

7:58

these US cuts go through, even partially,

8:01

but if other cuts come through from

8:03

other key key donors and others are

8:05

cutting aid budgets, then we have to

8:07

make further very very tough choices about

8:10

where we can't deliver at this scale.

8:12

Before we move on, President Trump said

8:14

the US AID agency, the foreign aid

8:17

agency, is run by radical left lunatics

8:19

who are getting away with tremendous fraud.

8:21

Elon Musk. claimed that officials are taking

8:23

kickbacks. He described it as evil, a

8:26

criminal organisation. Have you ever come across

8:28

that kind of thing in the US

8:30

foreign aid space? Well, let's see what

8:32

their reports turn up. But I've worked

8:35

with US diplomats, USAID workers for almost

8:37

three decades now, and they've been great

8:39

partners in that effort. I'm the first

8:42

to say there was a lot of

8:44

waste and a lot of duplication in

8:46

the aid sector. And fraud? And we

8:48

uncover cases of fraud every year. And

8:51

one of the things I have to

8:53

do is to take action on that

8:55

fraud, to kick people out of the

8:57

organisations, to make sure that we've got

9:00

systems that are robust enough to deal

9:02

with that. But out there in the

9:04

field, we've got thousands of people working

9:07

absolutely every day. to feed people who

9:09

are starving, to reach people who are

9:11

suffering from pandemics, to give people shelter

9:13

who don't have shelter, to stop at

9:16

the horrific gender-based violence that we're finding

9:18

in Darfur and elsewhere. This is a

9:20

massive, massive sector, but it is doing

9:22

utterly essential work. And when you have

9:25

made that argument in the US, as

9:27

you have, and you said the discussions

9:29

will continue, what has been the response?

9:32

The incoming US government... clearly wants to

9:34

do some serious work around how US

9:36

taxpayers money is spent. And as I

9:38

say, I appreciate that. I think governments

9:41

have, they do have every right to

9:43

hold us to account and make sure

9:45

we're spending effectively. But as you quoted,

9:47

the Secretary of State, Markarubio, has said,

9:50

let's make sure this money goes towards

9:52

saving lives. Our job is to show

9:54

that that's what we will be doing.

9:57

And I'm determined to do that. come

9:59

back saying no? Do they come back

10:01

saying, look, you're just not going to

10:03

get this money? They come back saying, show

10:06

us. And that's our job now. To be

10:08

honest, I sit here with donors all the

10:10

time and they say, show us. And my

10:12

job is to make a very clear link

10:14

between the money that we're given by UK

10:16

taxpayers, US taxpayers, all of our traditional donors,

10:19

all of our donors, and show that it's

10:21

reaching people that outcomes. more than 40% of

10:23

your funding comes from the US. In value

10:25

terms, it's a huge figure. They

10:27

give more in government aid than

10:29

any other country. In percentage terms,

10:32

in percentage of GDP, it is

10:34

not. It's about 0.3% according to the Brookings

10:36

Institute. But when you look at that

10:38

figure for what you're funded by, why

10:40

should it be so weighted to the

10:42

US? Should you be going elsewhere? Can

10:44

you go to China? Yes. And are you?

10:47

And we are. We have to broaden that. Have

10:49

they indicated a willingness to step into the gap?

10:51

Not to step into the gap explicitly in

10:53

that way, but we were already going out

10:55

and talking to a whole range of new

10:58

donors. Some countries are already stepping up. South

11:00

Korea, for example, has recently increased their support

11:02

to humanitarian work. So I completely agree, by

11:04

the way, we shouldn't be dependent on one

11:07

donor. And I think the American people should

11:09

demand that we're not. So dependent on one

11:11

donor, it is time for other countries to

11:13

step up. But also, I think we're in

11:16

a moment when a lot of aid isn't

11:18

going to come from governments in the same

11:20

way. This goes back to the financial crash

11:22

2008-2009, but also we're in age of

11:25

where governments are turning more inwards, where

11:27

there is that concern to focus on

11:29

jobs, growth. So where does it come

11:31

from? So that I think we need

11:33

a much broader humanitarian movement. We need

11:36

to go back to the stage. You

11:38

know, apartheid didn't fall just because of

11:40

governments. Individuals or companies? I

11:42

would say both. So the private sector is already

11:44

a major, major donor to what we do in

11:47

the humanitarian space. But I think, you know, I

11:49

wonder whether we could go out there and say,

11:51

look, the UK government is no longer able to

11:53

do 0.7% the figure that, you know, was so

11:56

iconic for so many years. But why don't we

11:58

go to the public and say... Are you

12:00

able to help us here? Can you

12:02

step in to save these lives? Right.

12:05

Let's turn to Gaza, which you brought

12:07

up earlier. You have just come back

12:09

from there, where you are coordinating aid.

12:12

And as we speak, there is a

12:14

question mark over whether the ceasefire will

12:16

be sustained. Now it's worth saying that

12:19

you are a former British ambassador to

12:21

Lebanon. You know a lot about the

12:23

Middle East. If the ceasefire fails, what

12:26

are the consequences? Devustating. You know, I

12:28

was in Gaza then. for a couple

12:30

of days and you see people picking

12:33

through the rubble, looking for their relatives.

12:35

You see dogs picking through the rubble,

12:37

looking for the corpses and the dogs

12:39

are fat and the people are thin.

12:42

The devastation there is beyond anything I'd

12:44

imagined. My staff, most of whom have

12:46

lost their homes and lost family members,

12:49

going back to their areas in northern

12:51

Gaza and having to use GPS to

12:53

find where their homes were. I visited

12:56

the only hospital that survived in the

12:58

north that stayed open, where doctors were

13:00

operating, delivering babies under sniper fire, and

13:03

where one doctor to Mahmoud is written

13:05

on the wall, tell them we did

13:07

what we could. And the people of

13:10

Gaza that I met are asking us

13:12

that question, did we do what we

13:14

could during this period? And it's a

13:17

responsibility for me to tell those stories,

13:19

having been in there, because you can't

13:21

do it. The BBC can't go. So

13:24

because international journalists can't go, we've been

13:26

relying on aid workers to tell us,

13:28

we've been relying on local journalists. Was

13:30

there something when you went that you

13:33

thought I haven't quite prepared myself for

13:35

this, despite all I've heard? And I

13:37

really had tried to prepare myself. I

13:40

talked to a lot of people who've

13:42

gone in, I've talked to people who've

13:44

done this job in the past, to

13:47

try to get that resilience. You see

13:49

the pictures, you know, you showed them

13:51

all the time, but nothing prepares you.

13:54

I prepared for the worse and it

13:56

was worse. It's just the... scale of

13:58

the devastation, particularly in northern Gaza. Just

14:01

miles and miles, you just drive through

14:03

the mud. And the sense of just

14:05

desolation and despair. And by the way,

14:08

I also visited Khabuts in southern Israel

14:10

that was attacked by the act of

14:12

terrorism on October the 7th line, met

14:15

survivors there, one in four people there,

14:17

were killed or taken hostage. And it's

14:19

important to recognize that too. But in

14:22

Gaza now, we've got almost 50,000 deaths.

14:24

We've got 100, at least. injured. We

14:26

have a new category now of people

14:28

we're trying to reach and the acronym

14:31

is single child, single injured child, no

14:33

living relatives. So the scale of what

14:35

we have to achieve there is massive.

14:38

But since the ceasefire, three weeks now,

14:40

we're getting through 700, 800 trucks a

14:42

day with that essential aid. So to

14:45

your point, if the ceasefire falls... then

14:47

I fear we can't get that aid

14:49

through, we can't save the survivors that

14:52

we need to save. Right, well one

14:54

of the reasons we're in this situation

14:56

where it is so shaky is, and

14:59

Hamas is saying, as I say as

15:01

we speak, that it's delayed the release

15:03

of hostages because Israel is not honouring

15:06

its side of the deal. And they

15:08

gave a whole list of examples. They

15:10

claim that only half the fuel trucks

15:13

agreed are being allowed in, 25, not

15:15

50. They say only 50,000 tents when

15:17

200,000 have been agreed, no caravans. Are

15:20

they right? So the ceasefire agreement is

15:22

incredibly complex. I'm very involved talking to

15:24

both sides and I'm in Israel as

15:26

well talking to them about the ceasefire

15:29

agreement. I was clear when I was

15:31

there that we are getting broadly the

15:33

cooperation we need to get those trucks

15:36

through. We're delivering more trucks than we

15:38

were asked to deliver. So we are

15:40

delivering at scale. I need that pipeline,

15:43

the convoys to continue. And Israel is

15:45

allowing those trucks in? Israel is allowing

15:47

those trucks in. Israel is honoring its

15:50

side of the bar. Israel is allowing

15:52

the truck numbers in that we wanted.

15:54

Now we have a daily debate about

15:57

what goes on those trucks, the size

15:59

of the truck. trucks, whether we're getting

16:01

enough tents, I'm confident that we are

16:04

delivering life-saving aid at scale. Because you

16:06

make the point about the deal. The

16:08

deal is complicated. It is also detailed

16:11

and it has numbers of tents. We

16:13

have got the number of tents in

16:15

that we committed to get in. Now

16:18

Hamas are challenging Israel, a number of

16:20

facts around the wider aspects of the

16:22

ceasefire, but they're not telling the truth

16:24

on this. But I'm confident that I'm

16:27

getting through, that we're getting through... the

16:29

humanitarian supplies that we were asked to

16:31

get through, which we promised to get

16:34

through. And if the ceasefire stays in

16:36

place, then we'll continue to do that.

16:38

You know, before the ceasefire, I was

16:41

having convoys of 80 trucks go in,

16:43

and 79 of them were getting looted.

16:45

We were getting fired upon by the

16:48

Israeli forces. We got fired on a

16:50

couple of days ago, by the way,

16:52

by the Israeli forces. But we were

16:55

getting our trucks through, but in a

16:57

tiny, tiny scale. Now, much, much larger

16:59

than that. And as a result, famine...

17:02

real danger that has been averted in

17:04

Gaza. So part of this, it's not

17:06

the specific reason Hamas gave, but they

17:09

have mentioned it, is the longer-time plan

17:11

put forward by President Trump, which is

17:13

to clear out Palestinians and he's confirmed,

17:16

that his view is that they're cleared

17:18

out permanently, that the US owns it.

17:20

What do you make of that? Is

17:22

there any sort of... do you engage

17:25

with it? Of course we engage with

17:27

it. President Trump is a powerful character.

17:29

The most powerful man in the world

17:32

is a permanent member of the Security

17:34

Council. You know, if President Trump can

17:36

deliver a two-state solution and genuine peace

17:39

in the Middle East, I'll be the

17:41

first to be applauding, you know, and

17:43

celebrating. Is this the way to do

17:46

it? And, well, let's see. I haven't

17:48

seen the finer detail of this proposal

17:50

yet. He's been pretty clear, though. Nothing...

17:53

I would say that forced displacement, if

17:55

that's what's on the table, is not

17:57

going to help. You know, I talk

18:00

to a lot of Palestinians. and it's

18:02

important that they're consulted on this. A

18:04

plan cannot just be imposed on the

18:07

people living in Gaza and elsewhere. So

18:09

you've got to talk to the Palestinians

18:11

too. What they're telling me is they're

18:13

not going anywhere. They're taking the

18:16

tents that we're giving them. So

18:18

is it ethnic cleansing? Well it

18:20

would be ethnic cleansing if people

18:22

are being forcibly displaced.

18:24

Now let's see what is in

18:26

this plan as an emergency. seizing

18:28

land is one of those ideas

18:30

which I think I hope that

18:32

the international system was created and

18:35

international humanitarian law in particular to

18:37

prevent. Let's wait and see what

18:39

emerges. I've seen, I was in

18:41

the region over the weekend, I

18:43

talked to the Jordanians, I talked

18:45

to the Egyptians, there's been quite

18:47

a fierce reaction from the region

18:49

and from the Palestinians as well.

18:51

The key key thing for me.

18:53

Let's keep this ceasefire going. Let's

18:55

save as many survivors as we

18:58

can while we can. Could it have

19:00

the effect of getting the Arab

19:02

world to come up to unite

19:04

around a proposal for the future

19:07

of Gaza? Well, maybe it

19:09

will. And I know the

19:11

Arab League gathering heads of

19:13

state on the 27th of

19:15

February in Cairo. We need

19:17

practical ideas. The Palestinian people

19:19

are despairing and hopeless. the

19:22

Israelis and there's no solutions

19:24

to this apart from two

19:26

states living beside each other

19:28

security justice opportunity that's what

19:30

is best for the Israeli

19:32

people and best for the

19:34

Palestinian people I haven't heard a

19:36

better idea than that yet the US

19:39

decision on aid your reaction to it

19:41

you clearly think it's a mistake

19:43

but was it because you were

19:45

thinking of individual countries You've

19:47

been to Sudan recently you're

19:50

going to the DRC or was

19:52

it because you thought of the

19:54

wider picture of the decades of

19:57

US involvement? So I think we

19:59

need US leadership in the world.

20:01

And one argument that I'd make is

20:03

that if you vacate that space, you

20:06

don't build a golden age, that you

20:08

build a golden age by engaging with

20:10

the world, by helping to solve these

20:12

problems, and that if you leave these

20:15

fires to burn out there, then they

20:17

will come in our direction. So I

20:19

hope... Because of climate change, because of

20:21

pandemics, because of future economic crises, future

20:24

conflicts, future conflicts, future conflicts, future challenges

20:26

that require an international solution, a multilateral

20:28

solution, a global approach. You can't build

20:30

a wall that keeps those challenges out.

20:33

And so we have to work together.

20:35

Now, is the UN perfect? Absolutely not.

20:37

But no one's come up with a

20:39

better idea yet for global coexistence and

20:42

for actually working together to deal with

20:44

those crises which are all coming in

20:46

our direction, whether you like it or

20:48

not. So when Mark Arubio, Secretary of

20:51

State, says with questions, does it make

20:53

America safer? Does it make America stronger?

20:55

Does it make America more prosperous? And

20:57

Donald Trump, whether it questions, whether it's

21:00

aligned with American interests. You would say?

21:02

I would say yes, humanitarian, absolutely. And

21:04

by the way, that's not so different

21:06

to a British position that I've articulated

21:09

in the past as an ambassador, which

21:11

is, you know, does our diplomacy make

21:13

Britain stronger, safer, safer, more prosperous? You

21:15

know, it's right that countries ask. is

21:18

the money that we take from our

21:20

taxpayers actually serving our interests as well.

21:22

Now of course I will argue and

21:24

I argue because I'm out there seeing

21:27

the impact of this work and seeing

21:29

the need, seeing people the scale of

21:31

the challenge we're dealing with. Of course

21:33

I will argue. that a great way

21:36

of spending that money is to help

21:38

us to deal with those challenges, to

21:40

feed people who are starving, to get

21:42

medical support to those who need it,

21:45

to stop the epidemic of sexual violence

21:47

that I heard about in Darfur. But

21:49

governments have a right to hold us

21:51

to account for delivering that. Right. When

21:54

President Trump was elected first time round,

21:56

you said his election created a vacancy

21:58

for leader of the free... world. At

22:00

that time you argued the UN Secretary

22:03

General could fill it. Do you say

22:05

that now? Well I think the UN

22:07

Secretary General is showing great leadership of

22:09

the world in standing up for humanitarian

22:12

principles, international humanitarian law, and for a

22:14

system of global coexistence. He's doing that

22:16

on behalf of member states. Not just

22:18

one member state or two member states.

22:21

I think the world as a whole

22:23

needs to reinforce that sense of cooperation.

22:25

It can't... It can't be just a

22:27

US-led order. This has to be a

22:30

proper multilateral system. And the UN has

22:32

to reflect that global diversity. And I

22:34

said many things before. I took this

22:36

job in my private capacity. My team

22:39

have put this badge on me to

22:41

remind me that I'm here to speak

22:43

on behalf of the UN today. Okay.

22:45

Does it make the world much more

22:48

dangerous? Just briefly? Aid cuts from any...

22:50

The world is a dangerous place right

22:52

now. And any cuts to... to aid

22:54

will make the world more dangerous. I

22:57

make the case more positively though. We

22:59

need that international support. We try to

23:01

raise that 47 billion dollars to make

23:03

the world a safer place. And I

23:06

think we need to win the argument

23:08

afresh for global solidarity and for reaching

23:10

out and caring at a human level

23:12

for those in the most dire need

23:15

around the world. I don't think we've

23:17

lost that argument. Tom Fletcher, thank you

23:19

for coming on hard talk. Thank you,

23:21

sir. Frank

23:24

to in innovation, 10 consecutive years.

23:27

Arizona State University isn't just ahead

23:29

of the curve. It's creating new

23:31

paths to success. paths Learn from notable

23:33

clinical and research faculty and research That's

23:35

a degree better. Explore programs at

23:37

Explore programs at a .edu.