Skip to main content

tv   Inside Story  Al Jazeera  April 11, 2022 10:30am-11:01am AST

10:30 am
it on mosque as announced, he won't join twitters board after all mosque was offered a seat when he became the platform largest shareholder last week. he's been making some suggestions about with his future, including turning his headquarters into homeless shelter. those are flagged binding advertising from the platform. ah, this is al serra, let's get a recap of your top stories. french president in manju macro says the next 2 weeks will be decisive for his country as he pass for a runoff against far right challenge of marine, the pen based opinion polls suggest he will win with a very tight margin. but it's smith has moved from paris. i think we can expect much more intensive campaigning from emanuel macaroni, only had one raleigh a few days before voting on sunday. now for the next couple of weeks, he's going to be criss crossing the country,
10:31 am
visiting cities and towns all over france. he's heading to the north of the country today. marine la pan. we can expect something very similar from her. she was already campaigning intensely, intensely. she says that he's going to be her last election campaign. we can expect her and her party to really push it pockets downs. parliament is meeting in the next few hours to choose the new prime minister, who will replace them wrong call and who was ousted over the weekend. security is high off to tens of thousands of people across the country onset. com, cool to protest against his removal from office. a pilot indian teenagers shelf during israeli raids on sunday has died from his injuries. soldiers have been carrying out rates in the pied westbank town of janine where refugee camp is located. but looking for relatives of a palestinian man who shots in killed 3 israelis and tell a beef on thursday all through the austrian chancellor is to meet the russian president. vladimir pierson later this monday. the meeting will be patient's 1st
10:32 am
face to face meeting with an e leader. since russia invaded ukraine, comes 2 days after the austrian chancellor visited the site of the alleged russian war crimes. earlier he tweeted that the war must stop and cold for humanitarian corridor was to be opened. and video showing angry residence in china's largest city, protesting and shouting out, officials has been posted online. shanghai is 26000000 people under strict locked down off the record number of new cove and 19 infections. people can only go out once a day to collect food. and polls have closed in mexico's referendum to decide whether president, on the manual lopez over the door should stay in power and 90 percent, who voted said he should remain president ok inside story. coming up next on counting the costs by then orders. what he says is an unprecedented release
10:33 am
of oil reserves. will it bring prices down? can germany when itself, off rush and gas in 2 years and taxing crypto currency profits in india? how will it affect investing? counting the cost on al jazeera president vladimir lens, he tells all j 0 he regrets ukraine gave up its nuclear weapons in the 1990s, and he named several governments that could give security guarantees to protect his country. one of them is china. another is russia, but will anyone actually do that? this is inside story. ah hello, welcome to the program, i'm rob madison. ukraine is preparing for what it says will be fierce fighting with
10:34 am
russian forces. president vladimir polanski told al jazeera that russia could renew its attack on. keep, if you cranium, forces fail on the eastern front. mass evacuations have been carried out in the eastern city of comma tossed on friday. more than 50 people were killed in a strike on a railway station. ukraine says russia fired missiles while thousands of civilians were waiting to catch trains. russia says it's not to blame. it says cave is responsible. ukrainian forces of manage to retake other times and zalinski says that's giving people new hope. yes. so we can see that the war is not over yet, but so many people are excited and happy that some areas have been liberated. and i'm pleased to speak about such places because in others, people are dying, some because of the blockades and others because they're being killed by russian soldiers. but we have put up a face response and they have failed to take keith with residents. zalinski also says that if ukraine was to be a neutral or non aligned country,
10:35 am
it would need security guarantees from foreign governments. and russia would have to be part of that push. ah, yet yahoo! kasanya was eyes. i think that this agreement would be impossible without russian federation. so that's, that's another story really than i now that harland being wanted and some other countries wanted to consider becoming a security guarantees. we will also ask for china, france and germany, they also are aware of this situation and so forth. they are showing some sort of respect, hooked and support bad sir. in addition to support and assistance, we need to have very detailed negotiations in order to understand which country is ready to provide, provide, which specific support and assistance and that guarantees. gonzo lensky suggests.
10:36 am
ukraine became weak and at greater risk from invasion when it gave away its nuclear capabilities without 1st securing stronger guarantees than those in the budapest memorandum of 1994 wood up by sky marin jak moore's nimble of duck. how could you give up the weapons and such way without finding any serious document just making a big present for what those who have received that. i mean, what have received what we have received, what ukraine have received. we have received a war, and this is one of the reasons why we have become weaker. we have weakened our status, our defense. we have weakened our population. this is what we have given away. we have given away the wife, had those people who died. this is one of the reasons here. now,
10:37 am
once again, i would like to reiterate, it's not because you would, you would be willing to use that. absolutely not. ah, okay, let's bring in our guests peters on my of is executive director of eurasia democracy initiative is joining us on skype from near keith. i'm from brussels, david or sullivan is a former secretary general of the european commission is currently director general of the institute of international and european affairs and from glasgow in the u. k . anton baba shane is the editorial director at riddle russia. it's an online journal on russian affairs. gentlemen, thank you very much indeed for being with us. i want to talk about this reference that the president of ukraine has made with regard to nuclear weapons. peter, let me start with you if ukraine. busy still had nuclear weapons after the 19 ninety's. what could we have been seeing in ukraine now?
10:38 am
well, you know that that remark actually he 1st made to june the buick security conference a few days before the invasion. i was there in the room when he said it and the russians actually then later use this as an excuse. you know, one of the reasons to start the war that look, ukraine is gung ho about going nuclear and they're going to new cars. but, you know, unfortunately, you know, russians would have used a pretext to do so they don't, they don't need a pretext. obviously, i, when i was getting my master's degree at columbia diversity, one of my, one of my professors was kenneth, was very well known as the retention of the so called the theory of nuclear peace. according to each nuclear weapons are, you know, probably the closest countries have to a security clad guarantee of their security. needless to say, you know, when you're dealing with a country like russia,
10:39 am
it does appear that ukraine would have been probably better off if it had kept it's nuclear weapons. and that's why we have this situation destiny, where we are right now, and which 5 to find the formula, which would be the next best thing to in, on nato membership pre k. but that will be the topic of discussion today. david sullivan, if i understand correctly, many of the nuclear weapons we've been talking about in the 1900 ninety's, we're actually soviet weapons and the ukrainians had access to them. but the russians, at least in the early days, had the codes for them. do you think that it ukraine was wise to give up that nuclear power and did it actually have much of a nuclear power to begin with? well, i think that's a good point. grove. i, indeed, they were so weapons. they were based in new grain and ukraine had physical access to them. but i also understand that there were some limits to their ability actually to, to use them or 22225 m. i also understand that meant
10:40 am
a lot of the equipment was already somewhat degraded and not in, not in very good shape. so my personal view, i mean i perfectly understand why you great feels extremely g, particularly from the guarantees that were given of their territorial sovereignty in return for letting the weapons go back to, to, to, to russia. but honestly, i, i don't think it was, it was viable for a relatively small country in the middle of europe at to be nuclear armed. i think it would have caused more problems for your grain rather than solving any. and i think it could have been quite d, stabilizing in the regions. i think that ukraine made the right decision at the time, but they are absolutely right to point out that the guarantees they've got in return for doing that have not been respected by russia. and this of course is a flagrant breach of the undertakings which were given which started with the annex of crimea. i want to come on to the security guarantees in a moment, but anton publishing, do you think, given what our 2 previous speakers have said,
10:41 am
that it would've made any difference at all if you train had had access to some sort of nuclear power, some sort of nuclear force would have made any difference to russia. well, i have to say that i agree fully with what was already said. i mean, at the time in the early ninety's, absolute made sense to bring to give it up. and of course, it would have made the situation completely difference if in 2014 ukraine had bites . at the moment, we're only seeing that the talk of nuclear ukraine is being used instrumental lives by russian propaganda to kind of be for the efforts to d. r mills are great. ok, let's talk about the security guarantees that the president has been talking about that the in the cup that we heard earlier on. he was saying you give a list of countries that could be security guarantors. i want to ask 1st of all, and i'm told i'm going to stay with you. what is your understanding of what is
10:42 am
involved in being a security guarantor under circumstances like this? well, that is extremely interesting question, and i do not quite understand what service security guarantees mean and the moment, i mean when the talk of it initially came up, it was, i think, fraser, something close to the article, 5 of nato, which sounds quite bizarre because russian side actually dot com and all that much on that because they knew quite well that this is something you were a p, a nation would not be able to provide to brain. so this is all rhetoric. i mean it's nothing, no one could guarantee grain to intervene. to give it more that it's already giving at the moment or to give something that it was brain was denied, for instance, defacto membership of nater. so i don't really think that at this point we're quite there yet to be discussing would be the security guarantees. because the war is
10:43 am
still valid and we are probably going to see maggie fighting next week and pretty much throughout april. my at this moscow still focused on achieving a decisive military victory on the ground. so all the talk about potential security guarantees. well is a bit too mature. peter, what's your assessment of this talk of security guarantees is, is this just rhetoric goes there is a, could actually lead to, to something the basis of some sort of discussion that the very least well, i absolutely agree with the previous speaker. this is not a very tenable topic on the decisive battle. what is promising to be a decisive battle, you know, with, with tank armies and artillery. this is what the ukrainian side is saying. we should be expecting. and ukraine is getting heavy weaponry as well. not only defensive but offensive on, you know, so we are looking. we're staring at a very,
10:44 am
very difficult scenario in the next 2 weeks. and keep in mind, main 9 to the sacred in a deed in account is over the nazi germany plat map which is gonna have to pony up some victories to show his subjects during the military breed. so it's all going to be obviously decided on the battlefield, not diplomatically after that and blood was said this, you know, he does believe that only by meeting blood report and personally we could hope for some kind of a breakthrough diplomatic breakthrough, but only after ukraine winds the battle, we mean it's country to what we, you know, grow up hearing from diplomats, you know, there is no military solution to this or that conflict. unfortunately, we are at a point where only a military solution is feasible and only after decisive showing by ukraine's military. and let me just add a few points, you know, the several issues we made very 40. without them,
10:45 am
we cannot hope for any sort of discussion of do it a guarantee unless russia commits to the ukraine. reparations hundreds of billions of dollars of damage has been inflicted on ukraine's infrastructure. need this to say countless lives. we don't know that the exact figure, but it be thousands and thousands and thousands. then the very difficult question of territorial concessions. i mean, are we talking about pre february 24th withdrawal of troops right? or 32014. obviously, without the withdrawal of troops, i at least be able to, to the positions before the 24th of february. we cannot talk about india significant breaks. and finally find the key of has said that there will be no diplomatic agreement. no peace on, you know, if it involves the white washing russian war crimes during the invasion. obviously budget david, i want to ask you because the just sort of to talk about this, this idea of security county. it gives us interesting 5. the president you feel is
10:46 am
appropriate to bring it up, given the points that the gentleman have or have already made. and also one would imagine that if like the list he gave of possible guarantors include the u. s, the u. k. and russia, if those guarantors were in place. and surely if there was any incident told in ukraine, it could bring those guarantors directly into conflict with each other. and one would imagine foreign governor governments do not want to do that, which is actually what we're seeing at the moment with nato. yes, i think i understand we're prisons in teams trying to do is trying to on the one hand, can see that you grant would not join nature which is slightly false. but nonetheless, it is the line that moscow's peddling. and he was, but at the same time he was trying to give his country a secure future by saying, well, i'm not going to join. we love to join nato, but we want the rest of you collectively to agree to underwrite our security. and he wants the permanent members of the un security council. he wants a range of other countries. now i agree entirely with 2 previous figures and on and
10:47 am
peter, that frankly, this is, you know, this is not the subject of the moment and will only come back if and when the military situation has created a situation where, where diplomacy becomes relevant again. but i do see what the president was was trying to do. i'm, i'm skeptical as to whether it's achievable we, we've had it in the past. the were guarantors for cyprus, u. k, greece and turkey, and, and turkey was one of the guarantors did. they did an order in cyprus and neither of the other to do anything about it. so you know, the history of these things is, is not, is not particularly happy. so i understand the idea, i guess what the president was was trying to put, put in to play. but there are many, many obstacles to making such a move success. and the difference, i think, is that he wants a really binding international treaty, very different in nature to the budapest memorandum which, which was the guarantees on territory sovereignty given after the exchange of
10:48 am
nuclear weapons. so i think he's looking for a much more legally binding in. and as you say, i think any country will be very wary to sign up to that. it means that they might act to commit troops in the event of an injured we've all referred to that the coming conflict that we're going to see in ukraine, that the president himself has referred to a particularly in the east. anton, let me ask you this. so far we have seen russia move towards here, but stop. we've seen it move towards mario paul and destroy much of, of mario poll. there seems to be a suggestion. it is, if not pulling back than refocusing towards the east of the country. what's your assessment of why russia is doing that? what putin is trying to achieve by making that initial move and then moving back? well, i think the answer is quite obvious. it was the initial miscalculation of how easy
10:49 am
it would be for russian troops from march to ukraine. and in fact, it turned out to be quite, may see, got quite bloody and rational too are not able to acquire the goals, but they had a plan in store for them. so they are just counting on the fact that they still go to mass, significant enough group of forces in the east of ukraine to essentially crush your cranium. notes your resistance to claim a certain amount of territory. and probably to incorporate that either in dpr deal or north or directly into the russian state. and claim this to be some sort of intermediary scenario or for the day. but this, it, regrouping essentially is happening there because they were not able to accomplish what was initially planned because brushes taking haven't losses and the brain is biting quite fiercely. so this is, this is not a strategy a and probably not even strategy. it's probably plan, see, my can, you know,
10:50 am
look into that. that's why david, i'm told, referred to the fact that moscow wanted, quote, decisive military victory on the ground. do you think that that is what we're leading up to the next few weeks or indeed months? i guess because there is a, a prediction of course this could go on for a very long time. yeah, indeed. i mean, i, i look, i'm not a military strategist and i certainly don't tend to know what's going on inside the head of prison. and i think the explanation given is the most plausible that they clearly have not had the early military victory that they hoped they had talked, i think, to take, to install a puppet government and basically declare victory. the ukrainian fierce resistance, huge cost, but with great bravery, has stopped that. and i think indeed they are falling back perhaps to a military outcome which can be described as a victory that's. that's what it looks like. but listen,
10:51 am
there could be many twists and turns in this. ready before we see anything like as far as, as a sion of facilities. so i think we need to be very, very careful in predictions because quite a few of them proven to be misplaced in the early stages of this conflict and even more recently. so i think it is plausible explanation, but i wouldn't say that mr. book is completely given up on the idea of a wider military victory or graph linking and the eastern provinces with crimea down to the south of ukraine. there are probably a number of different ideas circulating in russian military circles and the question of what they think they can, they can, they can with that and this is probably going to be tested now, next few weeks. peter here were nodding through that. do you get the feeling that as far as negotiations are concerned, there's really not much point in trying to work out whether or not negotiations are actually working until we get to the point that our previous to guess of talked about. and russia has got what it regards as
10:52 am
a definitive military victory. indeed, it, i would, i would break my answer to 2 components. first of all, i would corroborate with david just said that, you know, put in is not only not been dissuaded from his idea to continue this war in ukraine . concentrate on the doug. i'm not even sure he's been dissuaded from trying to storm a 2nd time. you know, chunk german chancellor schultz has recently said that he is afraid that advisors are not giving him the full picture of what is happening in ukraine are not giving him the precise figures off the number of soldiers a lot. the radios reported a number of almost 20000 military debt. we're not, we're not sure if mr. putting deep in his bunker is still not receiving, you know, the true picture or what's happening. and the 2nd one is that, you know,
10:53 am
once again mr. putting is hell bent on destroying ukraine as not just as political entity, but as a culture. there was a, well, a very widely quoted piece, a published on the nova b, r. i a news which is a governmental website, a few days ago, following butcher, which spelled out what russia's goals should be in your grade. and basically, the gist of the article is that, you know, it's clear that it's no longer there's some kind of anti russian who ruling to you . but the entire ukrainian people is very much against russians against russia. and so russia and used to solve the ukrainian question by trying to get rid of ukrainian culture deep, ukrainian eyes, ukraine. it's no longer do not again, asian had demoted ation d. ukraine is ation folks. so we take that the radical,
10:54 am
we take the practical butcher and we have all the inklings of the genocide that is being can be the great david they, we mentioned right at the top of the program that the president's lensky has told algebra that russia could renew its attack on keys. if ukraine force is failed to hold russia on the eastern front, is that a concern? do you think in ukraine that foreign governments may, frankly lose interest if the fighting moves further east and towards the russian government? i. well, i don't know what the big new grain are thinking i would say seen from brussels with nature the you, i think that would not be the case. i mean, i think people understand that this is a hugely important conflict. i mean, 1st and foremost because of the enormous suffering of the ukrainian people, the refugees, the jets, the destruction of property. it's horrible,
10:55 am
and none of us ever thought we would live to see this in europe in our lifetime. and people have understood that this is mr. newton war and this is, you know, nobody wants a direct confrontation between nato and russia for the obvious risks of nuclear that we talked about. but i think people are not going to lose. ready interest in this or feel anything other than the fact that the outcome of this conflict is absolutely fundamental for the future security architecture of the european continent. and on, do you think that, given the fact that there's a lot of speculation, this conflict is going to carry on is going to be a long term conflict. afghanistan was a long conflict that russian people had to go through. do you think that the russian people at the moment are prepared to go through a conflict that like that are they going to tolerate something like that? is a very good question. i can certainly say that russians do not quite understand do
10:56 am
scope over the call like the cost on the call list. i mean, sanctions only started to be manifested in the country. i mean, they are expected to be seen more in the summer and probably even more so in the fall. so this is probably the horizon that we should be looking at because up until the fall and maybe the winter, it would not be sort of catastrophic for the russian economy. and it could be bearable for the propaganda to, to manage the expectations of the people. if it takes longer than that, it's going to be kind of problematic. i mean, we're seeing criminal react to any sort of sign of descent and all and is trying to create a picture of total unity behind the cause, which is understood. but the majority of russians as rushes, fighting nato in you praying that's approx or war to defend russia. i mean, a lot of propaganda, they're being involved, but i don't think it is something that russia getting yours for
10:57 am
a very long time. so it is create a call to support and supply ukraine for as long as possible. so we could stop rushes and pads on the ground and military buying it more time. and the more time you bring can resist, the less likely it would be for russia to be able to maintain its pressure on ukraine. long term. anton baba since thank you very much indeed. and i want to say thanks to all our guests spaces all my of david o'sullivan and anton barbershop. and thank you to you too. for watching, you can see the program again any time by visiting our website. i'll de 0 dot com and for further discussion, go to our facebook page. that's facebook dot com, forward slash ha. inside story. you've also joined the conversation on twitter. handle is at ha, inside story of the rob matheson and the entire team here in doha. you buy from a
10:58 am
ah, many aspects of afghan culture had been systematically destroyed or forgotten. the afghan films archive has been largely preserved through all of these years. when so much else was burned, looted, or blown up a small group of people who risk their lives to save the national archive. they managed to preserve the films, and these records of all of the other afghanistan's that existed saving decades of history. they believe these films had something to give to the present moment. in the 960 s afghan cinema was born filmmakers went on a way of the dangers to come from
10:59 am
the al jazeera london, bro, cost center t people, unprompted uninterrupted. the social media space is as dangerous as the street, so it came to be at least as much as the street part 2 journalists. net re malik, and right to and political analyst, non job any abolla. i want people to be attentive to the commercial interests that shape these platforms. studio be unscripted on elders era. the heart wrenching good buys loved ones, not knowing when they were united ticket, women and children heading west to relative safety, often leaving when behind among them. foreigners also trying to get out train rise of a free, but it's on a 1st come, 1st serve basis here at the bus station there only a few rides available and that's only to the surrounding villages. so people like for me in rose, now need to find another way to get out of the city. ah,
11:00 am
but for now they like many others, would have to return home hoping tomorrow is a better day. ah hm. mm. oh man, yeah, my whole warns vote is against the appeal of xenophobia ahead of a 2nd round election. so down with fall right. rival marine le patton. ah. my money inside this is out. is there a lie from doha, also coming up? a moron. com support is demand. he be reinstated this box don's haldeman proposed to elect a replacement on minnesota.


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on