Episode Info
- Season7
- Episode5
Hosted by Christina Ruffini and Sir Richard Dearlove
Guest
Clarissa Ward
Clarissa Ward is CNN's Chief International Correspondent recently returned from Ukraine after witnessing civilians taking up arms against the Russian invasion.
Episode Summary
CNN Chief International Correspondent Clarissa Ward speaks to One Decision after getting back from deployment in Ukraine, witnessing first hand how civilians have taken up arms and risen to the threat of Russian invasion with remarkable unity and grit. Putin's invasion so far is not going to plan - so where does she think he will be headed next? With analysis from co-host Sir Richard Dearlove
Listen & Subscribe
- Watch on YouTube
- Listen on Apple Podcasts
- Listen on Spotify
Transcript
INTRODUCTION
Lockwood: You're listening to One Decision. A single choice can trigger a wave of events, affect millions of people, and impact the world. Like many of our colleagues, we've been scrutinizing Russian president Vladimir Putin's decision to invade Ukraine. Why he did it, what led to it, and how the choice of a single man has ripped up an entire country, triggering an exodus for millions of Ukrainian civilians fleeing their homes. Clarissa Ward is chief international correspondent for CNN. In her time as a journalist, she's seen firsthand how war has devastated people around the world. She's recently returned back to London from the front lines in Ukraine, so it was wonderful to sit down with her and my regular cohost, Sir Richard Dearlove. Well, the three of us caught up just after Vladimir Putin had made a much anticipated speech in Moscow for the May ninth victory parade, an annual military pageant which celebrates the Red Army's against the Nazis back in 1945. There had been much expectation that Putin would make some kind of major announcement in his speech, a declaration of war and mass mobilization, or perhaps claiming victory in the Donbas. Yet again, he took us all by surprise. It was, by by many accounts of it, it was a bit of a damp squib since he never really gave any major announcement as we have been anticipating him to do so.
INTERVIEW
Dearlove: Well, I was really surprised when I read the text of the speech, and I rang up one of my military commentating friends and his comment was, Putin blinked, which I thought was an interesting comment, because there wasn't any apparent move towards escalation. And I just wonder whether there is something deeper going on in Moscow. Those of us who've lived, well, behind the Iron Curtain, you know, know what the May 9 is like, and the sort of parades and emotions that those powers that, you know, defeated German Nazis attached to this date is hugely significant in the calendar. And, yep, it was a damp squib. But I mean, I think, you know, he blinked, maybe something, you know, what happens next is now what interests me.
Ward: I thought it was very interesting in the sense of when everybody predicts one thing, President Putin tends to do something completely different, which then throws everybody off balance for one second. And everyone's thinking, well, what did he mean by that? And what does this portend? I think that what it allows him to do, because I agree that it does sort of seem like, you know, did he blink or not? I think it's an interesting read on it. But what it also allows him to do is just to continue this war of attrition, essentially the sort of grind that could go on for months and months in the background and not necessarily formulated in the minds of Russian people is this hugely important thing at the forefront of the national agenda, but more as there's a special cooperation going on to defeat Nazism that some of your loved ones are involved with and it's going well, but we don't need to like obsessively focus on it. Right. It's just sort of going on in the background and will be going on in the background. It seems sort of vague and amorphous, which gives more opportunity to prolong. Although I would say the one clear sort of upside is that there's no sense that it's going to be expanded again. It really seems to be focused on Donbas. But looking at how incremental the progress is in Donbas at the moment, that could still be years of conflict potentially. So maybe he was sort of paving the way for that in sort of an understated way. I just don't know. I've given up many years ago trying to exactly guess as to the workings of his mind, but it certainly was unexpected.
Lockwood: Does he not need to carry popular opinion with him? And does a war of attrition, a long war against a neighboring country with whom so many Russians have got family members and cousins, is that a good strategy?
Ward: Well, I think on the first part of that, clearly nothing about this is a good strategy. I think rarely have we seen President Putin attempt such an audacious gamble that has backfired so spectacularly in his face and caused him such a huge amount of damage, both reputationally, economically, on the international forum. I do think it's easy, though, sometimes in the West for us to be a little overly optimistic about how people are receiving and responding to what's happening in Ukraine inside Russia. Which is not to say that there hasn't been dissent in, you know, within certain ranks of the Kremlin. That may well be the case. And and and the same, I'm sure, within some quarters of the military in terms of how the whole thing's been managed. But by and large, President Putin still does have a strong level of support in Russia. And I don't think that has been hugely diminished by the so called special operation in Ukraine. In part because it's, you know, as your listeners, I'm sure already know, but it bears repeating, Russian people are not being told anything that's really happening in Ukraine except for propaganda and talking points that serve the Kremlin's objectives. So you have seen time and time again instances where people in Ukraine will call family members, as you rightly point out, there's a huge amount of crossover and intermarriage between the two countries. And they will say, you know, Uncle Vanya was killed and this happened in our town and that happened. And the person on the other line in Russia will say, not possible. That's not possible. This is a special operation to defeat the Nazis who are raping Ukrainian women and who are awful. And you know? So the level of indoctrination is really profound. It is possible, of course, with all these various economic punishing sanctions in place that it will become much more difficult for ordinary Russians. Sometimes it can take a while to feel the full force of that of those sanctions. Although, again, in my experience, the Russian mentality in these sorts of times, especially if they feel the world is turning against them, is to pivot inwards, get your head down, struggle and survive. And there is an incredible stoicism, fatalism that kicks in that may well carry the day. Now this may be why President Putin did not do something like calling it a full scale war announcing a widespread mobilization. Because he may have decided strategically that that would be a bridge too far in terms of there would be many more people involved, then you have raised the bar significantly. You are creating a possibility for internal dissent as the war progresses and maybe doesn't go the way you'd hoped. But at the status quo level and based, you know, not on actually being inside the country, but just what I'm reading and seeing and hearing, I do not see a palace coup as being imminent.
Dearlove: I agree no palace coup as well, because, you know, we've never there's never been a palace coup in Russia, and there's no reason at all to think that there would be now. But I just wonder whether we might see Putin at some point shuffled off to a sanatorium and, you know, not really reappearing, and that the elegant way out is not to have a coup. And I think there's quite a bit of evidence now beginning to emerge that the sort of other Siloviki and the senior generals and the Russian general staff, they must be deeply concerned that they're on a road to nowhere and that somehow they need to back out of a one way street with a dead end.
Lockwood: You bring up the Siloviki, which is this a name that loosely refers to Putin's inner circle, which is largely comprised of former intelligence officers. And, you know, there is reportedly deep resentment apparently among members of Russia's military elite that reportedly takes issue with Putin and with the Siloviki, civilians with largely very little battlefield experience themselves commanding a military operation. There's complaints about top down corruption, which is resulting in bad equipment, poorly planned logistics. We've had CNN reporting on leaked communications of Russian soldiers complaining about these sorts of things, about the rations that they're receiving, the fact that they don't have fuel when they're going into Ukraine. And indeed, everyone pretty much in this inner circle is a former intelligence officer, not a field army veteran. So one thing that I'm really curious of, how much longer is the army going to keep marching to Putin's tune and and why isn't the Russian military sort of empowered enough to launch a coup against these KGB civilians? Richard, tell us your thoughts and particularly actually because Sergei Shoigu, who was the defense minister, I believe he was appointed in 2012 as minister of defense despite having no battlefield experience. I mean, there's gotta be a lot of resentment.
Dearlove: Well, I think Shoigu, you know, is I mean, he's there by virtue of his relationship with Putin and his loyalty to Putin, and he doesn't have a military track record, so that probably must be a problem for some of the professional generals. And, you know, to me, he looks like slightly sort of idiotic figure. Maybe I'm putting that a bit too strongly, but he's not an impressive individual. I mean, I knew and still know one or two of the key Siloviki. I mean, the cast has changed since I dealt with these people, but the one who is still there and probably more powerful is Patrushev. And Patrushev was head of the FSB for a longish period of time, and I met him in that capacity. And he's a very tough, clever, sinister, difficult man. I would be very wary of him, but I don't think there's any denying his intelligence and his capability. And I mean, I think if my thesis were fulfilled and Putin did disappear into a sanatorium, I think he's the likely stand in. And of course, the stand in in this scenario probably becomes permanent. I mean, you know, there is no succession planning in the Russian leadership. They don't, you know, they certainly don't succession plan. And, you know, it's probably a lethal occupation if you were to do so. But the invasion of, you know, Ukraine from the North down through this narrow valley towards Kyiv was an absolute military disaster. It suggests to me that it wasn't planned by the military, but it was planned by the small group of, you know, yes men who sit around Putin. They didn't understand. Well, there are lots of things they didn't understand, but they certainly didn't understand the way that the capability of the Ukrainian army had been increased. It's such an extraordinary failure. I mean, it has actually changed the geopolitics of Europe. And in a way, this is why I think this parade where nothing happened, or relatively speaking, nothing significant happened, is probably very significant in itself, because it was the obvious occasion for Putin to sort of cast his further evil designs upon the future of Europe, and he wasn't able to do it.
Ward: Well, was he not able to do it, or did he decide? I mean, has a lesson been learned from this disaster? And is this a way to try to kind of save face while at the same time, frankly, I guess it's a relief, right? That he's not doubled down on the bad decision and said, well, now we're going to do X, Y, and Z as well. I mean, maybe there's a sense that it gives one a modicum of I think comfort is much too strong a word, but at least perhaps designed for an internal, albeit an elite audience, to project a sense of, I am still a rational mind operating within the parameters of my orbit. I don't know, that might be wishful thinking.
Dearlove: I think you've definitely got a point which is, you know, valid. I mean, I think all I would say is I think that in the Russian system, as it's now being created partly by Putin and partly by the Siloviki, I'm not sure that Putin can save face. I mean, you know, what we're witnessing is the beginning of the end of this meeting. I mean, the question is how it comes to an end. I mean, and as I said, there's no succession planning, you know, in these brittle authoritarian regimes, they smash, you know, they don't sort of change. How is it going to change? I mean, I think that's really what we will, you know, be talking about and speculating about. And, you know, I'm thinking that one of the ways that they do it, which doesn't save face, but it makes it more elegant, is you know-
Ward: Is the sanatorium, he's sick, he has some type of cancer, which there's already been rife speculation about his health and all sorts of suggestions that he might have some form of cancer or Parkinson's. I've heard many things. None of them, obviously, I have any ability to confirm. But you're right, it would be a more elegant solution to the problem. Now, I did think it was interesting though, in the run up to the invasion, when he held this extraordinary National Security Council meeting and they were all summoned like naughty schoolboys sort of standing there while he presided over this enormous desk on the other side of the room. And he basically made them all stand up and say on the record, I support this. Patrushev included, and I guess what that does on some level is to remind everyone, well, first of all, to sort of humiliate some people and embarrass others and whatever bizarre power games are going on there. But also to remind everyone that you're all on the record now publicly as having supported me. You know, if I go down, you're coming down too.
Lockwood: I think that's really a good way of putting it. I just wanna turn the conversation to what is happening inside Ukraine because Clarissa, you just very recently got back from a trip to Kharkiv, which is Ukraine's second largest city. The speculation that Russian forces may in coming days be directed to turn on Kharkiv, Putin mentioned it in his victory day speech, fears that they will turn it into a second Mariupol, a city under siege. Clarissa, you were embedded with an incredibly brave paramedic team who were rescuing and treating injured people who are trapped in buildings, and there was a really, really poignant moment I thought, where you were talking to one of those volunteers, and I think she was called Alexandra. And she told you about how her mother had been begging and pleading with her on the phone for her to stop her volunteering work, to come back home, and she told her mother that it was just something that she had to do. I found it so incredibly moving. So just tell us more about your most recent trip to Ukraine, what you saw there, what you made of the current situation, and how the everyday people are dealing with these atrocities.
Ward: I think the first thing you notice going back the second time is how extraordinary it is that Ukrainians have just completely shift mindset. They're at full war footing now. It is functioning like a well oiled machine in the sense that it's rare in times of war that you see such massive solidarity for one cause. And really very few elements of society who are not galvanized by this wave of patriotism and anti war effort and doing whatever they can to be a part of it and putting their normal lives aside. And I often wonder what would it look like here in the UK or in the US if there was a war? Would people who were doctors and lawyers be just locking up their offices temporarily and learning how to shoot and taking up arms or volunteering on the front lines to evacuate elderly or disabled people. I mean, obviously, you have incredible courage and people really do step into these moments. But the way in which Ukraine has done it with this really profoundly humbling mixture of grace and resilience and grit has been pretty astonishing to see. I also was amazed just going back to Kyiv. The last time I'd been there, it was very much anticipating an attempt by Russian forces to roll through the capital. Then they were forced to retreat. And the day I arrived, people were saying, should we order Mexican food for dinner? And I was like, what are you talking about? But you can have delivery Mexican food in Kyiv, which is a silly and small detail, but which speaks to the rapidity with which people are like, let's get back on track, not in terms of let's go back to our old life of, you know, having fun and going to cafes and all that stuff, but more about like, let's make sure that the engine is continuing and that businesses are reopening and that we are not sort of being bullied into a sort of solely defensive posture. And I think that that is also reflected in the sort of military strategy that you see as well. Recently, we've seen a number of major counteroffensives coming from the Ukrainian military in and around Kharkiv, for example, taking back villages that have been under Russian control for some time. And when you think, as Sir Richard had talked about earlier, I mean, the sort of dire prognosis, not only within Russia from the FSB, but also in the US, the anticipation was that Kyiv would likely fall in a matter of days. And here we are months later having this conversation. So in the context of Kharkiv is different for many reasons. It's a city that has basically been subject to relentless bombardment now for the entirety of the war with different levels of intensity at different points of time. And you have parts of the city which are more or less uninhabitable, Saltivka where I was with those paramedics, for example, and yet people continue to live there. And then you have other areas of the city which have not yet been evacuated, where the mayor has not called on people to leave their homes and where people continue to try to carve out some vague fashioned normalcy within what's possible there, given the fact that there is constant bombardment and it goes through the night and the shelling through the day. And there is definitely a sense of palpable fear from people that they would become the next Mariupol, as you mentioned. I still think strategically that would be exceptionally difficult for the Russian military to pull off at this stage. They did try to go into Kharkiv earlier and they were beaten back pretty quickly with their tails between their legs. And with the sluggish progress that is being made in Donbas by the Russians, Kharkiv would be such a diversion for them that it could potentially have a seriously debilitating effect on their entire operation. Now, you're always going to see a lot of activity going on around Kharkiv by virtue of where it is geographically, right? So it's just over 20 miles from the Russian border. And the push in the North. So when you look at Donbas, right, it's a push up from the South, in from the East and down from the North. The place, the sort of center of the operation for the northern pushdown is a city called Izyum, which is about two hours south of Kharkiv. So that supply line up from Belgorod in Russia down to Izyum is crucial for the Russians, and the Ukrainians are often trying to disrupt it. And I think that's a big part of why you're seeing a lot of bombardment in Kharkiv in general. Not necessarily a desire to try to take the city, but to try to neutralize it and to try to stave off counteroffensives in and around that important supply line. So now the key question I think becomes not to get like bogged down in the sort of military strategy of this, and I'm not an expert on military strategy anyway, but now that Mariupol has largely been taken by Russian forces, does that then free up a lot of Russian forces to go and join the fight in Donbas? And would that have some kind of sort of an empirical effect on the battlefield that you could really see? Because when I was there on the front lines in Donbas, what you were seeing is like two days of fierce fighting and you move up three streets, the Russians one day, and then four days of counteroffensives and the Ukrainians take back one street and then, and so on and so forth. And so these towns that we were talking about, Popasna and Rubizhne and others, were not towns that I think it was anticipated would take so long to capture or to fall. And they are towns that are still contested even now, you know, nearly two weeks after I left.
Lockwood: Clarissa, Putin's decision to invade Ukraine has transformed this country, and it's gonna take years to recover. The UN is now projecting as many as 8,000,000 people are going to flee Ukraine as refugees. The UNHCR is now seeking nearly $2,000,000,000 to support desperate people in neighboring countries to Ukraine. They say that 7,000,000 Ukrainians are displaced inside the country and 13,000,000 are still stranded in conflict zones and unable to leave due to the security risks. So in your reporting, how do you quantify the amount of damage, the havoc this man has wreaked on Ukraine? How do you quantify that for your viewers?
Ward: I think it's always a struggle. The camera obviously allows you to tell a story in a very rich and visual way, but it still is sort of two dimensional, right? So I can only give you a feel for what's right in front of me. It's very difficult to convey the sort of full scale or scope of a scene. Obviously, we use drones now as well. That helps to give people a greater appreciation of the scale of the damage. But what is harder to do is to make people feel understand acutely that in every single house that's been damaged is a family and people with a story. And it may be that they were living in their cellars for months as so many who I talked to were. And then one day the father, the man of the house, went out to get some water because there was no running water and was killed by an artillery shell. It may be that they were living in their basements as another family I met were. And one day the Russians turned up in their village and took their daughter away. And a 21 year old math teacher from Brovary, which is a suburb to the East of Kyiv, and she's never been seen again. And so all of these people, every home has so much heartache and so much loss and so much fear and so much anger and so much anxiety. And the challenge, I think, as a journalist is to make it possible for people around the world living lives that are not necessarily touched by conflict to feel profoundly connected to the stories of people in Ukraine and what's happening even though they may never have visited there. They may not speak the language. They may not be deeply interested in the geopolitics. But they can understand how it must feel for a mother to see Russian soldiers take away her 21 year old daughter and never see her again. And so that's what I try to do. I try to tell stories that are really driven by characters and by people, because when we use numbers like 8,000,000 people might become refugees. What does that really mean? What does that really look like? Who are those 8,000,000 people? It becomes it's so enormous, it's so vast that we can't really personalize it and humanize it. And I think that's a hugely important thing to do as journalists so that people around the world don't become inured to it, don't just get used to it, but continue to feel the full force of the horror of what's happening there every day. And that's how you keep this story on the front page, and that's why it's so important to keep it on the front page.
Lockwood: Very well said. And in your, I think fifteen years you've spent reporting on conflicts around the world and speaking to war stricken people and meeting families affected by the most awful atrocities. Is there anything that struck you about Ukraine? I mean, how has covering the bombardment in these cities, how does that compare to the time you spent in Syria, time you spent in Yemen and covering other conflicts?
Ward: It's always very difficult to compare conflicts because they're all so different. There are certain threads or strands that run through all of them, but they all present different challenges and they're all unique in the sort of the dynamics. They're united in the sense of tragedy and violence and horror and bloodshed and loss, but they're very, very different in terms of the logistics of covering them. And one thing that's been very challenging with Ukraine is that it's a vast country. I think a lot of people don't have an appreciation for just how enormous it is. So you will, you know, you'll already be in Donbas and you'll still be driving two or three hours every single day to try to get closer to these towns in different directions and get a more accurate picture of what's going on. And that's why, you know, at CNN, we've had to have many different teams in all different parts of the country. And then the other thing that's made it challenging is that there has been such a concerted effort on the Russian side to push out disinformation and misinformation. And that's always very difficult as we become more accustomed to social media wars. It means that there's a lot more for us to do in terms of vetting information, verifying videos, trying to get a sort of more objective sense of what actually transpired in a place. And then even just dealing with the fallout of the sort of inevitable counter narrative that will come out. The Russian state TV just did some bizarre piece about me and the story that I did in Kharkiv, which you mentioned and saying, oh, you know, Clarissa Ward almost didn't get out of Afghanistan. She made it in the end. We hope she gets out of Ukraine alive. And you're just thinking to yourself, what on earth?
Lockwood: But that's when you know you're doing a damn good to make a comment like that.
Ward: But I mean, my point is there's all sorts of things that I haven't had as much experience, although to a certain extent in Syria that, yeah, you heard contending within Ukraine.
Lockwood: I'm glad you bring that up. I know we're running out of time, but I really just want to ask this something in particular, you bring up misinformation and war of narratives. You were in Afghanistan covering the fall of Kabul and the rest of the country to the Taliban and you were attacked on social media from various right wing columnists and supporters. They took issue with you donning a hijab whilst out on the street, failing to grasp that on the occasions when you were broadcasting from inside a secure compound, you were free to have your hair out, you wore colorful clothes, you wore what you want. Whereas when you went out onto the streets, you had to put on the hijab because the Taliban were in control. I really don't wanna get into US politics and the political climate in the States. The division is reaching fever pitch, everyone can see that. But I just wanted to ask you because you are there, you're risking your life to bring to the American people and CNN's international audience, factual and reliable information about what is happening in these places, particularly in Afghanistan, a place where many people are invested in, they've lost family members in, and you have these armchair keyboard warrior types, trolling you on social media, was that frustrating for you? And are you finding it harder these days to communicate the truth to a receptive audience? Is it harder to get the message across?
Ward: I think in some ways, it is harder because there's a lot of skepticism now from all sides about mainstream media. But my attitude to it in general, honestly, is tune it all out and get on with the work. Senator Ted Cruz wants to make some ridiculous categorization based on his misunderstanding of one five second part of a piece I did, let him have it. And if the Democrats then want to take something that I said at the airport out of context and go to town with that and say that I'm critical of President Biden, let him have it. It's not important cause it's not really about me and it's not really about the work. That's about them, you know, using this stuff for their own political objectives. I think our job as reporters is to, you know, pull up our sleeves and do the work and tune out the noise. And sometimes it is hard and it is distracting, especially on social media, which is just a cacophony often of some really critical voices, powerful voices, hurtful voices, violent voices, all sorts of voices. But I can't control them. That's not my job to do that. So I tend to just put Twitter down, especially in a big breaking news story. And remember that really my job in that situation is to give a voice to Afghan people and just stay focused on that and let everybody else fight on Twitter about it.
Lockwood: Well said, well said. I know we're out of time, but I just have one last question to you. And there is something that people may not know about you and something that I am insanely jealous of. Jealous is probably not the right word because a lot of hard work will have been involved. And that is because you're somewhat of a polyglot. You speak apparently French, Italian. I've seen you speak Arabic. You speak Russian, Spanish, and apparently a little Mandarin. How?
Ward: It's all at different levels. Let's just be clear. I speak French and Italian decently, Russian and Arabic conversationally and Mandarin. I speak like basic. I lived in Beijing. So you do have to speak some Mandarin or you're not ever gonna leave your apartment.
Lockwood: I mean, I just I think that's I just I am. I'm just super jealous. I mean, I grew up in a different country. I grew up in Indonesia, and I wasn't even able to hang on to that language. My Indonesian is terrible. Yeah, no, it's terrible. I used to speak it fluently and then we moved to Singapore and within six months I forgot all of it. It's hugely embarrassing. But yeah, I mean, it must make such a huge difference to be able to talk to people in their native language. And, you know, you're on camera talking to people in their native language.
Ward: It does. And I now feel acutely aware of it when I was in Afghanistan. And I don't very sadly speak any Dari or Pashto. And you really feel that you're missing that extra muscle. It is a wonderful thing, even on a very limited level, obviously, in terms of my linguistic abilities to be able to just open the door and have that connection, that direct connection. And, okay, I'm not understanding everything you're saying, but I'm getting the thread. And it means that instead of having that translator as this sort of extra barrier between us, we're actually communicating directly in a very organic, authentic way. So whenever I can do that, it's definitely a real help.
Lockwood: It's hugely I'm in absolute awe. I speak very, very bad Syrian Arabic and even worse Indonesian, terrible French. Richard, do you have any languages up your sleeve?
Dearlove: Well, I've lived and worked in France and Switzerland a lot, so I speak French fluently. And my French was pretty good at one stage. It's a bit rusty. It would take a few weeks to get it back. Rather peculiarly, I used to speak Czech quite fluently.
Ward: That's interesting.
Dearlove: Makes a lot of sense. Yeah. Because I was behind the Iron Curtain in Prague. I had to speak it. It was my job to speak it. So when I studied it and got to quite a high level, whether I can still speak it now. I can still read it, but I'm just sort of massively out of practice. And, you know, after that, my language is all little bits and pieces. But I'm not a great linguist. I have family members who are fantastically good linguists, but I won't go into that. You know, Japanese, Chinese and other members of my family really speak these languages seriously well, but so there is a sort of tradition in our family of foreign language speaking. And my wife is a fluent French and Russian speaker, so there you go. I'd like to speak Italian. I'm really fed up. I can't speak Italian because I do Latin and French. You know, you can have No time like the present, Richard. I know. I know. Maybe I should give it a Do it.
Lockwood: Clarissa, thank you so, so much for joining us. It's really, really great to hear your experience, you coming back from the field, and you no doubt will be back to Ukraine soon. So stay safe. Thank you so much for your reporting and for sharing it with us. Thank you. It's been my pleasure. I've really enjoyed the conversation. Can I add my admiration for your courage, Clarissa? You are amazing. Oh, thank you, Sir Richard. That's really kind. That's all for this episode of One Decision. You can follow Clarissa's work on CNN. She's on Twitter, ClarissaWard. You can also follow us. We're OneDecisionPod. And don't forget to subscribe so you never miss an episode. We drop new shows every Thursday. From me and the team, thank you for joining us. See you next time.
