High price to pay: EU and UN wrestle with Middle East war

President Barack Obama. Virginia, we are counting on you. Republicans want to steal enough seats in

Congress to raid the next election and wield unchecked power for two more years. But you can stop

them by voting yes by April 21st. Help put our elections back on a level playing field and let

voters decide not politicians. Vote yes by April 21st. Paid for by Virginians for fair elections.

It was not supposed to be like this. For once, the EU was going to set its own agenda.

European countries agree that they need to take charge of their own destiny and this week leaders

from the EU27 were going to hunker down and get serious about boosting European industry.

You know, everybody's favorite C word, competitiveness. I mean, that's the word I expected to be

echoing around this corridor as I stand here towards the end of the latest European council summit.

Nope. Once again, Donald Trump hijacked the agenda. This time it's the war he's waging on Iran

alongside Israel. Europe isn't officially involved, but it sure is affected by snarled trade routes,

spiking energy prices, and fears that the violence won't stay limited to the Middle East for long.

Indeed, Israel and Iran might both be guilty of war crimes by targeting energy infrastructure.

That's what UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres told my colleague and McHelvoy in an interview

for this podcast. If there are attacks either on Iran or from Iran, energy infrastructure, I think

that there are reasonable grounds to think that they might constitute a worker.

Are you suggesting that each or both sides could have committed a war crime? Both sides.

I don't see any difference in relation to if we target civilians. It doesn't matter who

target civilians. The targeting of civilians is totally unacceptable. And of course,

civilian infrastructure like this one is also extremely, extremely serious.

Guterres spoke to Anne in Brussels after conferring with EU 27 leaders over lunch.

It was part of a marathon meeting where they grappled once again with the seeming

impotence of big international organizations like the United Nations and the European Union.

So what can the EU do to insulate citizens from the fallout of Trump's war in Iran?

How will the instability affect Brussels' other priorities, like Ukraine and strategic autonomy?

And even if there were solutions to all these problems, would countries actually manage to agree on

any of them? I'm Sarah Wheaton, host of EU Confidential. Later in the episode, we'll bring you

more of Anne McHelvoy's interview with the UN Secretary General. But first, it's a European

Council summit, and so we are here late on a Thursday night in the used to slipsiest building.

Joining me are Zoya Sheftalović, a familiar voice and chief EU correspondent.

She's not to be confused with our senior climate reporter, Zia Weisa, and also here is Chief

Foreign Affairs correspondent Nick Vinecker. So I went back and relistened to our episode from

the previous UCO in January. Zoya and Nick, you guys were both there with me. And at that time,

you know, leaders were actually feeling pretty good. Trump had just backed down on his threats

against Greenland. They felt like they had a game plan. They thought they might actually use

their trade bazooka. At the same time, they came away saying, look, what worked here is we reunited,

and okay, we get it. We need to make some bigger forms to help us stand on our own. And so they plan

this summit to talk about competitiveness, and then it all devolved into chaos again. Nick.

That's right. I mean, this is sort of a pattern where effectively it's Donald Trump setting the

agenda of one European Council after another. The last one was Greenland. This one where it was the

war in Iran that is completely overshadowed this summit with the energy crisis that it's caused,

so that immediately went to the top of the agenda, the spike in global energy prices, and you know,

various European countries saying we need, we need help right now, short-term fixes to deal with

these crises. And effectively, as they're sitting here, we find out that, you know, Belgium's

energy supply, Italy's energy supply is going to be severely affected by strikes that have happened

in Qatar. This very sort of live feeling that this was another crisis summit effectively.

We also, kind of in parallel, saw this debate about to what extent countries should intervene,

help Trump try to clear the blockage in the state of Hormuz.

Yeah, this has been a topic of conversation over the past week. At the beginning of the week,

Donald Trump got really mad after EU countries said that they weren't going to be helping out,

and you know, look elsewhere. There was a conversation at the Council tonight around what is

going to happen with that should the EU actually contribute. In part, there is a fear that if the EU

doesn't help out the US now, then Trump may retaliate and not help Ukraine. So there is this

sense that maybe Europe does need to do something. So there was a discussion around perhaps what

that looks like is some sort of a UN-focused mission that the EU contributes to. There were a few

countries, five countries that came out overnight, and said, look, we would consider sending

ships to such a mission. So I think there was kind of coalescing around the idea that maybe

Europe doesn't need to step up a little bit and help secure the strait, not to condone what

Israel and the US are doing in Iran, necessarily, but to ensure that the global flow of oil and

fertiliser and so forth through the strait of Hormuz continues. Yeah, and just to plug the next

part of the podcast and Mikhail Voj interview to Antonio Guterres, and he made some points about how

harder will actually be to clear out the strait of Hormuz. But sticking with the EU, actually,

we saw the intersection of all of these wars and energy availability collide with regard to one

country. So you've been talking about it all week, hungry. There was a big question if they would

be able to get Viktor Orban to drop his late veto on the 90 billion euro loan to Ukraine. Didn't

work. It did not, Sarah. And this was, what was interesting to me was there were a few people,

particularly in the Berlin camp, who thought that maybe we would get here in the end. And they

thought that maybe what would happen is Vladimir Zelensky would ring into this video conference,

and he would perhaps assure Viktor Orban, yeah, look, I'm going to fix this pipeline. They thought

maybe that commission mission that was on route to the site of that damage might have arrived,

inspected it in given a sense of what the timing might look like. So there were all sorts of plans,

and the story that I've got coming out shortly has some reporting about what happened in the room

last night. Ultimately, what happened was Viktor Orban was not interested in any of the solutions

that we're being offered. He wanted to make this a political point for his election campaign ahead

of that April 12 election. And so the leaders pretty quickly within like 90 minutes realized he

wasn't going to be budging. And so they just called it quits and they said, that's it. We will move

this to the next Yuko in April. That's the informal European Council summit in Cyprus. And I think

that's when this issue is going to be really back front and center because the leaders today

were hideously upset at the fact that Orban went back on his word that he gave at that December

Yuko. So I think by the time we meet again in April, there's going to be some sort of coalescing

if Orban is back, then there will be some action at that EU Council summit. Nick, what are some of

the ideas for how to deal with Orban? It seems like there's kind of a mix of Karen and Stix.

Yeah, I mean, up until now there has been a desire not to feed into his election campaign.

So any action, any statement that would be inflammatory or sort of build on the conflict,

you know, they knew that Orban was going to feed it right into his social media account.

And that's effectively what he did right here today came out of the council room and started

recording videos about how he's isolated. What I've been hearing from some diplomats and this

is a little bit sort of early stage is that if he is reelected, they're willing to start a

serious conversation of how to deal with Hungary or basically the idea of rebellious states, states

that don't behave in sincere cooperation with other EU countries. We know that the article seven,

this would allow them to strip voting rights from Hungary. That's a tough hurdle to cross because

you need effectively unanimity minus one, but they're also talking about other avenues,

more funds that can be frozen and other ways of sort of reigning in Orban. And everything we heard

just like Zoya was saying is that the tone around the table was harsher and more confrontational

than it ever has been before tonight in Brussels. Yeah, we heard in the closing press conference,

Council President Antonio Costa, known for being kind of a back slapper friendly guy saying

the council cannot be blackmailed remains to be seen. Zoya, I want to turn to you. So let's dive

into this energy pricing debate affecting the whole block. You've been reporting on this really

fascinating tension. This is the second time in four years that European countries have been

cut off from a major fossil fuel supplier. So it makes sense to double and down on renewables,

but it's not a fast fix. It's important to keep in mind that at least for the time being does not

really a problem supply. Qatar, for example, is only 4% of the EU's gas supply. The real problem

is that all of this is driving up prices on global markets and EU's really exposed to that.

And yeah, to that renewables aren't a short-term fix. They're long-term fix,

like they're going to win the EU of fossil fuels, of imports, but a lot of debate here today in

Brussels has been, you know, what can we do in the short term? What can we ask? After European

Commission in a short term, without having any unintended side consequences and side effects,

that hampered a more long-term goals. And some countries are pushing to at least temporarily

scrap the EU's major lever for renewables and for fighting climate change. Can you walk us through

a little bit through the emissions trading system and what the discussion was about today?

Sure. I mean, the emissions trading system basically reduces emissions by having factories and

power plants pay for their emissions. So it sort of incentivises the switch to cleaner production

methods, cleaner sources of energy. But because it charges that price, it also adds a little bit to

energy bills. And it actually adds roughly 11%. I mean, it counts for 11% off the average European

bill. That's comparatively little, but it is a bit higher in some countries that are particularly

dependent on fossil fuels such as Poland or Czech Republic. And from those countries, you hear

like a lot of demands that can you please do something about this to the European Commission? Can

you please take the price down? Can you do something about that? And on the other side, you have

countries that are sort of more climate ambitious, like Spain, like the Nordic, I say, you know,

do not touch this instrument. It's been really successful. And so where did we land? Are they going

to make changes to this really landmark system? So what you heard today is that there'll be a long

planned reform that the Commission will do this summer and that it will be modernised. In so far,

it's really not a huge decision that happened here. I think the cans basically hit being

kicked down the road. I mean, this is basically sort of the starting guns in fired for the lobbying

around like government lobbying around this reform. And we'll probably keep coming back to this

exact debate like for the next few leaders summits. So is the EU actually doing anything to provide

relief on energy price spikes caused by the war? So the Commission's tactic is broadly to sort

of pass the buck to member states and saying, look, like you can cut power taxes or grid charges

or do some subsidies to help people and companies with their energy bills. But they've also said

they're going to try and look into some more short-term things. It was a lot of fun and I

promised to make some proposals and adjustments over the coming days and weeks and months

that are not entirely clear yet. So we'll have to see what they are. Okay, days and weeks and months,

I think we're all actually just hoping this conflict will resolve itself in the days and weeks

and months and not seeing a lot of signs that the EU is going to do much in that direction.

Stepping back when Antonio Costa came in as the new head of the European Council, he was really

trying to say, look, I'm a friendly guy. I want us all to get along. We're going to have retreats

together with the leaders. He went to each capital. He kind of famously cultivated an individual

relationship with Viktor Orban. I'm not seeing that he really has anything to show for it. Orban's

going back on his promises. This is the second time that we've seen statements on Ukraine signed

not by 27 countries, not even by 26 countries, but by only 25 countries now. He's losing,

losing people. Nick, what does this say about Costa's effectiveness?

Yeah, I think this is a big test for him and we saw it in his press conference at the end of

this council where he's trying to reassert his authority essentially and say, we will not allow

ourselves to be blackmailed by Viktor Orban. But as you said, this is actually the second time

that Orban or probably more than that has come and has basically called the leaders bluff.

Come to a council with some obstruction, some obstacle, and the EU leaders have prided themselves

with finding a way around it or finding some kind of trade with Orban to bring him on board.

Effectively, they've never really gotten him to sort of bend in a way. I've certainly heard

the critique from some diplomats around town that Costa's method, which is friendly,

exchanges of letters, may not be all that effective. And they also point to the fact that in this

latest standoff, Costa sent a letter to Orban saying, you have violated a key principle of the

European Union and that, and people were expecting some consequences and those consequences have

not yet come. So you're hearing critiques saying, you know, we should be playing more hardball

with Viktor Orban. That's not what Costa's doing. He is the good cop in this scenario, but obviously

that is showing its limits. And Zoya, in the lead up to this summit, we heard a lot of complaints

from countries that commission president Ursula Fonterlian was overstepping her authority to make

decisions about EU foreign policy. But like, we're seeing EU leaders just get farther and farther

apart on that. Yeah, I think there was always criticism around Ursula von der Leyen perhaps doing

too much, going too far, taking too much power, centralizing power. The flip side of that, which

is the argument that her people make and her back is make and have been making to me repeatedly over

the last few weeks is, look, no one else is doing it. We don't have a Merkel figure who's taking

charge, who's ringing up Viktor and making him bend. We don't have someone, you know, like Macron

at the peak of his powers, who he's able to come in and really make the decisions that need to be

made. So the argument is, look, there is a vacuum. There is no one, you know, Friedrich Merz,

the German Chancellor isn't doing it. The French President is weakened because of the fact that he's

facing this election next year. So ultimately, what the backers of von der Leyen say is, no one

else is doing it. Someone's got to take charge and so she stepped into that void. So I think there

are two sides to that argument. But certainly, you do get a sense of frustration among certain

diplomats and from certain countries who are saying, look, Ursula von der Leyen, take a step back,

this is Al Jolbe. Last time, we talked about the summit being a tipping point, when there was a

clear game plan for dealing with Trump. What are you going to be watching over the next month, let's

say, if we're, if we're writing the first draft of history here to make your judgment about the

significance of this Yuko? I would look at Ukraine, basically. I don't know if it's this Yuko,

but clearly what we're seeing is Trump's attention drift away, even further away from Ukraine.

Now he's fully invested in the Iran War. He's losing interest in the peace process,

and that's putting more of the onus on the Europeans to be able to supply Ukraine,

to be able to push that peace process forward. So be interesting to watch if the Europeans try to

really kind of grab the wheel in the peace process. Perhaps even started some form of dialogue

directly with Putin. That's been floated by a few leaders now. I think that's a dynamic to watch

really closely in coming months. For me, I think this Hungarian election is really all I'm thinking

about, because I think if Viktor Oban is re-elected, and he comes back to that next European

Council summit, the informal insipers, and he is still acting like a blocker, or even if he's not

acting like a blocker, but just, you know, having seen what he did, and the fact that he went back

on his word, and the EU does nothing, then that's going to be a huge, huge tale about its powerlessness.

I think what I'll be watching for is, do they put forward some sort of plan, some sort of punishment,

because what he has done has crossed a red line. All of the leaders have said it,

Kostya said it, Wanda Lion said it. So, you know, if you cross a red line, usually that means

you've got to get punished. So I'm going to be looking to see whether he suffers any sorts of

consequences at that April summit, if he's still in power. If he doesn't win that election,

then of course I'll be watching very closely to see what his competitor Peter Maggiar does.

Well, we are all exhausted. Some of you still have deadlines to meet. So, Zia, Nick, Zoya,

thank you so much for joining me. Thank you. Thanks for having us. Thanks for me.

All right, we'll leave it there, but we'll be back shortly with Anne's conversation with Antonio

Guterres. Welcome back, and now to a political exclusive, Ann McElvoy's interview with Antonio Guterres,

the UN Secretary General. Thanks, Sarah. UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres is in Brussels

for the EU Council, probably one of his last appearances with European leaders, as his mandate

ends in December. He's also been meeting Ursula Fonda Lion, the commission president. Mr. Guterres

has said the war in the Middle East must stop, but as the attacks and retaliation rise,

his organization still relevant, or a toothless relic of the rules-based order.

Antonio Guterres, welcome to this EU confidential interview. It's a very, very big pleasure to do it.

So we are sitting here in the UN building in Brussels next door to the European Council

in between your meetings with EU leaders and ahead of the summit. You said de-escalation and

dialogue are the only way out of the crisis in Iran and across the Gulf. You urged a return

to the negotiating table. Are you at all confident after your visit to Brussels that that could be

possible? Well, it is possible, but it depends on the political will to do it. I am convinced

that Israel as a strategy wants to achieve total destruction of the military capacity of Iran

and the regime change. I believe Iran as a strategy which is to resist as much time as possible

and to cause as much harm as possible to the world at large, not only to the region.

And so the key to solve the problem is in the US and I think I hope that sooner rather than later

the US decides to claim that they have done their job, that they have won, let us say, from their

perspective. The war is my deep belief needs to stop and I believe that it is in the hands of the US

to make it stop. And you believe that there could be an outcome in which the US would be seen

to have won this war? Well, I think that President Trump will be able to convince those that

need to be convinced that the work is done, that the work can end. Can I ask if you've spoken

with President Trump at all in this crisis? No, no, no. I've been in contact with all sides

and indeed it's my deep belief that it's absolutely vital for the world at large

that this war ends quickly. And by the way, the biggest beneficiary of this war is Russia.

Russia has violated international law, has violated the charges. And the Iran crisis is a

distraction for all this. Russia is the country that is gaining more with what's happening in this

audible disaster that is the UN crisis. But the conflict has intensified after Iran

has struck at the gas facilities in Qatar and after its own south-paths gas field was

targeted by Israeli strikes. We've seen markets in turmoil. We've seen a very strong

worded post from President Trump warning Iran against further attacks in Qatar.

In a sense, it does look this particular incidence and the fallout from it, even in the time,

I think that you've been here on the ground in Europe, has been immense. Is it spiraling out of

control? This is indeed spiraling out of control. And the recent attacks represent an escalation

that is extremely, extremely dangerous. And that is the reason why I believe that we must stop

this war sooner rather than later, because as you mentioned, things have spiraled out of control.

It was interesting that you gave your first answer really about the U.S. and the U.S.

influence. And if they got to the point where they could say the job is done, they could

withdraw from this conflict. But at the same time, we have President Trump saying the U.S.

knew nothing about Israel's attack on the gas field in Iran on Wednesday. Do you feel the U.S.

still has influence over Israel in this conflict to hold off on attacks in Iran, given what happened

overnight? But that's exactly what proves that only the U.S. can stop this war, because apparently

Israel, as I said, an objective that is the total destruction of capacities of Iran, the regime

change, which were never initiated in the objectives by the United States. So my hope is that the United

States will be able to understand that this has gone too far. The Director of the U.S. National

Counterterrorism Center, Joe Kento, is only this week in protest at the war. Said Iran

posed no immediate threat to our nation, to the U.S. and that the war started due to pressure from

Israel. Do you believe that to be true? I have no doubt that this was expressed by the Secretary of

State. I have no doubt that this was something that corresponds to Israel's strategy that has been

since a long time ago to draw the United States into a war with Iran. That objective was achieved,

but now there is another objective that is much more important. This conflict is creating

dramatic suffering in Iran, but in the region, even in Israel, and it is creating devastating

impact in the global economy, whose consequences are still early to foresee. So we absolutely must

end the conflict, we absolutely must open the state of war moves, we absolutely must create

conditions for the oil gas fertilizers to again have access to the global markets. If not,

some countries, especially the most vulnerable countries will suffer enormously, and they have

nothing to do with this conflict. The charger of the International Criminal Court defines

attacks against civilian infrastructure, including energy infrastructure, has constituting

crimes of war, and we've seen this warning out in the last few days into attacks on oil and gas

facilities. Do you believe that war crimes, in any sense, of that phrase have been committed

in the attacks on Iran? If there are attacks either on Iran or from Iran, energy infrastructure,

I think that there are reasonable grounds to think that they might constitute a war crime.

Apparently there was an attack on Iran on the gas fields, and there were attacks from Iran into

gas complex in Qatar. Were you suggesting that each or both sides could have committed a war crime?

Both sides, I don't see any difference in relation to, if we target civilians, it doesn't matter

who targets civilians, the targeting of civilians is totally unacceptable. And of course, civilian

infrastructure like this one is also extremely, extremely serious.

The Secretary General, what role do you think the UN can play in this conflict? I'm thinking of

Iran here, but also you've had the Gaza, the Gaza-Israel crisis to deal with as well.

Given that the U.S. is really not working in depth with your organization at all, you've said,

you know, in this extraordinarily dangerous time, you haven't had a conversation with President

Trump. Do you believe that the UN has been side-alone? Now, we are in contact with the United States,

we are in contact with Iran, we are in contact with some key actors, I mean the Arab countries

of the Gulf, with the European Council, where I just was, my main objective is to see if it is

possible to create conditions in the state of our most similar to what in the past we managed

in relation to the black secret initiatives. Of course, it's a different context, it will be a

different solution, but we would like to be useful and we are establishing contact for it,

and we are prepared to manage a system, a mechanism in place, because we have that experience,

and we have to ask forces created to be able to do it, but of course it depends on the will

of the parties. I wonder what success within the bounds of the achievable would look like for you,

is it reopening the Straits of Hormuz to international shipping within a few days? That seems to be a

big pressure point, we've seen other governments come in behind that push. What would you consider

from this situation to be the best next development that you could, either reality,

hope that you leave Brussels? The rest is in the war, and it will be, we are

conscious or difficult, it will be to have the state of our most open in the context of a war going

on. In any case, we will be doing our best in relation to the possibilities either global

or humanitarian nature. We had that experience of negotiation in the past, as I said,

but we believe it will be very difficult if the war doesn't stop, so our priority, the absolute

priority is to stop the war and create conditions for the Straits to be open and to be open without

any kind of risk. Because, as you know, the drama is it's not only the question of the capacity or

not to destroy a ship. It is, you have insurance companies, you have shipping companies, you have

the seafarers, and if drone explodes close to a ship, I mean, this creates,

immediately, an environment in which it's very difficult to make things move. So, I think it's

very important not to forget the central objective and the central objective is to end the war.

European leaders have refused President Trump's request to participate in policing, the opening of

the Straits of Hormuz or sending their own ships or any other material to that effect. Do you think

that's been the right position? I mean, certainly the position of, say, Kirstaama in the UK that

this is not a conflict he wants to get drawn into Fudrich-Maths as something similar in Germany,

and that's pretty much, I think, becoming a majority position among the main powers. You could

argue if you want to kick the Straits open, more should be done and more could be sent to deterrent

effect by Britain, by Germany, by others. Well, I'm not convinced that it is the number of

warships in the strait that solves the problem. As I said, this is something that can only work

if the seafarers and the shipping companies, the insurance companies have confidence that

ships can move safely. So, this is not only a matter of number of warships around, it's a matter

of having or not a war environment in which an accident can happen at any moment. So, you think

Kirstaama broadly struck the right tone in approach holding back British support? I don't make

comments about what the Prime Minister of Britain does. I think he did it in his understanding of

the best interest of his country. Yes, it was, I should say, it was also today. We've seen the

leaders of UK France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Japan, in a joint statement, calling the Straits

to be open but effectively holding back. The question is, you think broadly restrained is better

for these powers, when you have whom have military power, they shouldn't get involved. I think

these countries made their own reading of the situation and I believe that they took decision

not to get too much involved knowing that the most important objective is deconfliction,

is de-escalation and peace. Your term of Secretary General will come to an end

later this year, the process for appointing your successor is underway, which must be

bittersweet after so long on this stage on the international.

Oh, it's not bitter, Norse, it's just my duty to do everything I can until the very last day.

There is call for a woman to be appointed as your successor, I think, Anna-Lena Bearbock,

as the General Assembly President has said that, do you agree and do you think this

bearbock might be a candidate? It's a good candidate.

Oh, I have no doubt, I have an excellent cooperation with her. I mean, I will not be part of the

electoral campaign, but I can only tell you that I have the best impression about our cooperation

and I think she has been an absolutely outstanding president of the General Assembly.

I should just ask you to finish what you feel you're seeing, you've seen the European

countries really trying to figure out the right response here, but there have been some differences,

some have said international law is no longer the best guideline. It was a fundamental line,

said something I'm paraphrasing her, but along the lines that may not be the be-all-in-end or

any more free-gish maths, said something similar, then we have Mr Costa saying, it's still international

law. It's very easy to misinterpret things. I mean, I was with Ursula van der Leyen today,

and she was adamant of the need to respect international law, to respect the charter,

and to have rules-based order. So I think if there is something that I felt today in my meeting

with the council that there was a very strong commitment was to not only international law,

but multilateralism and the very solid support that you went, and I'm very grateful for that.

You leave this pre-UCO visit in good heart about Europe's future in this crisis time.

Europe is essential. I mean, we need, I'm a great supporter of the idea that power relations

must be changed. We cannot leave and that the world will not be properly managed if it depends

on one single power or if it is divided between two single powers. We need a multipolar,

multipolar networked world, and we see developed countries, but we see emerging economies,

and we need to interlink them more and more with trade treaties, technology,

forms of cooperation, et cetera, to balance power in international relations, allowing to create

conditions for multilateralism to be effective. Because the problem of multilateralism today

is that because of the reckless behavior of the superpowers. There is no space for multilateral

institutions to be able to deliver. Antonio Guterres, thank you very much. Thank you very much.

And I'll now hand us all back to Sarah Wheaton.

Thanks, Anne. I'm actually finally off to bed, but if people want to hear more of your

interview, they can check out politico.eu for a longer write-up. Make sure to subscribe to the

Brussels Playbook podcast. That's the feed you're listening to us on right now. Please send

questions, comments, even voice notes to us over WhatsApp. You'll find it in our show notes.

Thanks to Peter Snowden, senior audio producer. I'm Sarah Wheaton. See you next week.

Rinse knows that greatness takes time, but it's soda's laundry. So rinse will take your laundry

and hand-deliver it to your door, expertly cleaned. And you can take the time pursuing your passions.

Time one spent sorting and waiting, folding and queuing, now spent challenging and innovating

and pushing your way to greatness. So pick up the Irish flute or those calligraphy pens or that

daunting beef Wellington recipe card and leave the laundry to us. Rinse, it's time to be great.