tv To the Point Deutsche Welle March 31, 2023 9:30am-10:01am CEST
ah, i wish i could have done more to save you a just a click away. find out best documentary on youtube. yeah. really with this morning. see the world as you've never seen it before. dr. now, to d. w documentary president vladimir puddings announcement that he plans to station tactical nuclear weapons, and baylor rules has raised concerns about the escalation. this is the 1st time since the $990.00 s that russia will deploy outside of its borders. russian forces have had little success in that aggressive campaign in ukraine, which has increased feels in europe that the russian president made is odd to
nuclear weapons out of desperation. meanwhile, the rest has supplied ukraine with modern bottle tanks that could be used in a possible spring offensive. so on to the point we ask for then atomic weapon plan is the nuclear risk rising with hello and welcome to, to the point. it's good to have you with us. how serious is the nuclear threat to understand this? i have 3, a steam guest with me today. given a don bluth is a journalist. she walks with one of germany's public broadcasting radio stations, deutschland funk, given her colors. russian affairs and had lived and walked in moscow as a foreign correspondent, 20 year left on our clara aunt,
a fellow for global security and nuclear policy at the european leadership network . e l n. she writes on nuclear policy on strategic stability issues as well as drafts, atlantic security. and joining us from bon is my ukranian colleague roman gunter ankle. he works for d, w 's russian desk, and has been extensively covering the war for the last one year. a very warm welcome to all of you. now, what motivated put in to take this decision, how it would be executed? we'll discuss all of that in a bit. but to begin with, very briefly, i'd like to understand from each one of you, what does this mean for all the parties that are involved? what does it mean for russia and bellows? it means that that was almost all totally dependent on russia. this is at 1st, it means that below rules might be even more involved in the war against ukraine.
and john, i think that all saw it might be a demonstration of russia to be not totally depending on china because china i was against this x i know what does it mean for nato and for the european union bay, briefly for near term, the european union i think it means that russia is continuing its nuclear rhetoric, which has been engaged in since the beginning of its full scale invasion of ukraine . last year. russia issued a lot of statements and has engaged in actions which have raised the spectre of nuclear weapons use again and again. and i think there's another instance of russia raising the specter of nuclear use in ukraine to intimidate western populations and decision makers. roman, coming to you, how do you see it? what does this mean for ukraine?
i think for your crying, there are 2 important points. one is that the danger from bella ross is growing. so bell rous was used by russia for an attack on ukraine a year ago by the this major invasion and russia could try to do it again by the 2nd point. and it is even more dangerous for ukraine is that the west will be and will, will be a stopped by this decision from a delivering or prevented by from delivering a more weapons to crane and stronger weapons. weapons that could strike at many hundreds of kilometers. deep in russian territory or a detective now occupied by russia. and as if it's something that ukraine would like to get from the west with those missiles and m e frustrates escalating on the nuclear level or threatening to escalate by deploying those weapons to bellows close to the ukrainian border. that might be kind of a stop shield, fraud the worst and to think twice about delivering those weapons like missiles
offset or, for example, a jet airplanes. now, vladimir within believes that there's nothing unusual about this move after all the united states has done it. do, he says, but the russian presidents announcement provoked outrage in the west, especially in germany. tactical nuclear weapons like this is gander missile are designed to be used in a combat zone and are therefore often referred to as battlefield weapons. they had lower destructive power and range than strategic nuclear weapons, but they are more precise. that is one of the reasons why germany reacted with alarm and spoke of another attempt at nuclear intimidation. russian president, vladimir putin, on the other hand, sees no breach of law in the stationing is tutoring issuing em. but there was nothing unusual here. i it would be able to do. united states has been doing this
for decades. teaching. they have long placed their tactical nuclear weapons on the territory of their allies. nato countries in europe are usually too grandmother to be rooted. the us has reacted calmly emphasizing there is still no evidence that russia is planning to use the nuclear weapons. some analysts regard the deployment as saber rattling ahead of an imminent ukrainian offensive and further western arms shipments with this stationing increase the danger of nuclear escalation in the war in ukraine. guessing this is not the 1st time that russia has used. the n word is the threat for real this time, or is it more lay the boy who cried wolf? i think it's again a new step of intimidation or trying to intimidate the west. because, oh, russia already deployed nuclear weapons are to colleen and guard which belongs to
russia, but also it's very close to the european union. this is one step. and, and i think that, oh, put in really understands that the of trust in the west towards these intimidation um is falling. so he needs to do the next step and the next step and the next step . and it's very important not to ignore it, but i think it's really, as it was said before, he tries to prevent the west from delivering those weapons. that would really might be a game changer because they would be able to reach russian occupied territory. and even our russian occupied crimea. so do you think this is a distraction because a lot of people are calling it bluff. ah, this is a big word. i wouldn't, i'll say it's a bluff, but on. but i think of the west should. oh,
really think well about on the threads and the dangers and ask themselves and discuss what would be worse for the west if of ukraine would be defeated or if there would be, oh, i don't know. 123 percent of really a tactical use of tactical nukes, tactical nukes. now, a lot of people actually don't understand the difference. so if you could just explain what are tactical meals, what's the other one that is being used and how i tactical nuclear weapons actually important in planning military actions. also very tactical or non strategic and strategic nuclear weapons. and there is no agreed definition of what kinds constitutes strategic or non strategic nuclear weapons bed and non strategic tactical nuclear weapons have a shorter range and they have a lower yield. so they have less that destructive potential, but they ours still extremely destructive, of course and,
and the notion or the name tactical in place that they could be used on the battlefield. but it is highly disputed. what tactical nuclear weapons use on the battlefield could actually serve. so if we just saw that both in c as america has been doing that as well. so what's the big deal? it's not unusual. now, if it is not illegal, if it does not violate any agreement, then why should need to have any problem with it. well, political context matters here. nato, of course, has an in clear sharing agreements with 5 states in europe who are hosting us nuclear weapons. but these arrangements have been in place since the cold war. they have not substantially been changed after the cold war. and the number of nuclear weapons stations in europe has decreased after the cold war. russia now announcing that it might put in place a new nuclear sharing arrangement in europe in the context of
a war of aggression as it is waiting against ukraine in the context of aggressive nuclear rhetoric. it has been engaging in this political context matters and how this announcement is of course, perceived. but i would tend to agree with guessing that this is probably another instance of nuclear sabre rattling, but do we know the numbers you talked about, the american nukes that are there in europe, in germany as well? do we know how many nuclear weapons are we talking about that america has here and what is that? sure. plenty there. well, especially when it comes to and as a recent announcement i put in, it's still very unclear what he actually is planning to do. yes. so far mainly that the new thing and his announcement mainly was that and nuclear storage facility is supposed to be ready by july. first, experts have doubts as to whether this is actually feasible and put in also has a history of announcing and things that he does than doesn't follow through on. so it really remains to be seen what this nuclear sharing arrangement will look like.
and in terms of numbers, it's really impossible to tell right now if i may add something, i think the comparison lakes that are between deploying nuclear weapons to barrels, to directly to the border with our nato. and of the west having a nukes in our other european countries, that doesn't work very well because shouldn't we ask if i think it would be a very significant if of the u. s. had mucus and poland close to the yellow rosen border. and 2 russians fear of influence. isn't that right? yeah, i would also add that russia already has the capability to, to reach targets and ukraine. so if it's supplies and nuclear weapons to various or not, and it's very little difference in military terms. i shall come back to that point on now ukraine, after buttons announcement ukraine has said that it would like to have an emergency
meeting of un security cancer. do you see that happening? and even if that happens, do you think that that is going to make any change? i don't think it will make any change. and russia will be taking over the chairmanship in the un security council in april. would sure ukrainians find ridiculous? and anyway, i think that ukraine is at a critical point after this announcement by russia, because as i've just said, russia might be trying to put more pressure on the west, not to deliver certain types of weapons. and this is in my, in my opinion, the major reason that prevents you are the worst from delivering the ukraine to weapons. it needs to win this war. and this is the only a card that russia can play to, to prevent it, and to stop it. and ukrainians already said that in the russian decision to deploy in nuclear weapons in bella ross is
a sign that russia is not winning on the battlefield. or at least not as fast as it was hoping for. and one more point, i think, why it is, could be dangerous for ukraine, because, or russia might use it to put more pressure on the west and on ukraine to accept some kind of a peace deal or negotiations about a peace deal, a settlement. and at this stage, a peace deal or settlement, or, or sees fire, or is, is a problem for ukraine, but it was, it would legitimize russian occupation. and ukraine is trying to prevent it. but by raising the stakes and making this announcement, and actually deploying the tactical nuclear weapons and bellows, russia is trying to put more pressure on the west also to negotiate. and we can also remember the china china had an initiative to 12 points or how to reach abuse deal in ukraine or at least cease fire. and we still don't know if any will come
out of it because the chinese leader hasn't spoken to the ukrainian president vladimir landscape or for no man just mentioned be still, do you think that's going to happen anytime soon? and especially after such an announcement, i can predict the future, but right now it seems that both sides are believing that they can make progress on the battle. so i think that those are not the conditions for peace negotiations. are there? yeah. because he, i agree, and i think a few days ago just asked me to please call the speaker of put in said that the currently there is no possibility to come to a piece of wire negotiations. and coming back to the point you were making earlier, russia already has gone in grad, then why better it was? why does it need to deploy nuclear weapons over there? i think it's a, at 1st, as i said before, is it's one moral step to intimidate the west. and because we are at
a critical point, ukraine is expected to deliver a counter offensive of this spring. and experts say that this of this year is really critical. for the further development of the war and the, and, and even the minister of defense of the united states, lloyd austin has had this week that he considers the chances of such a counter offensive. very and not very, but he said it's positive due to the modern western weapons and due to the high losses on the russian side, which is not only our soldiers but also on tanks and, and go back and re so this is really a critical point. and very much depends on whether and when the westwood you live or more modern weapons and especially long ranging miss house. are there was
some information from the ministry of defense in russia this week that they are down a long ranging u. s. miss how this might be this information. it's not, not sure, because we don't know really, don't know if those new tires are already on the ground in ukraine. but this information from moscow shows that it's very important and very sensitive for russia. and i think this is the main reason why put in made this announcement this week for the fact themselves, the preparation was done before. so it was expected. so tensions continue, even after 13 months. the industrial res, enough, don't nets, is at the epicenter of russian attacks. after many unsuccessful attempts to capture the town of buck mode in the region, russian forces have now shifted their focus. 2 of the foot is released by the state
police show scenes of devastation in the front line. 30. these images are like something out of a post apocalyptic film. the frontline town of, of deacon, north of don ask, has become practically uninhabitable due to heavy russian bombing. ukrainian authorities want to evacuate their employees as well as the remaining residents. those responsible warren, that the city could become a 2nd back moot. but ukraine urgently needs more soldiers at the front to drive the russian army out of decamp. military experts say that although the ukrainians motivation to fight remains high, there are insufficient numbers of volunteers, despite intensive recruitment campaigns. more and more men are therefore receiving draft notices. precedents. zalinski is calling for perseverance. they're near bravo . it is wrong and unfair. when our warriors who come from the front, let's have the feeling that for many in the rear,
the war is supposedly already over sheila's. russia is also running out of soldiers, according to experts, most of the newly mobilized forces are civilians with no previous military experience. does ukraine still have the strength to fight back? i shall come to that question because in 1st, what is the aim of shifting the i back to of the if gonna i'm not sure that this is the a shift really. i think the all fives continue at both places. um and of the russians. a few days ago we heard that they were less successful, but right now in bad moods or the russians control about 2 thirds of the city itself. so i would not, i would not, not ignore what's happening and battle, but anyway, enough div, this is
a place where fights heavy fighting have gone on since, since years already since 2014. and it's just, i think that russia reacts of flexible on the ukrainian counter counter offensive and out of the of car is very important for both sides because it is very close to don't ask the center of the don't ask region. roman does ukraine still have strength to fight back? it does, and you can use the time this winter to prepare for a major offensive. we are expecting in the coming weeks is still waiting for western and heavy weapons to come. we are seeing tanks being delivered, but it is not enough and some countries said that they will send tanks after easter . so ukraine is still waiting, waiting also for the weather conditions to improve but you are right. or you can
use the winter to, to, to, to train the soldiers. several new units are formed. and it is, exp, especially for the, for this spring offensive. and ukraine has been withholding the new forces from, for example, fighting in blackboard. because it hoped to use them in spring and then it had to use it to, to send at least some of the new for forces not to lose board. but russia is putting more and more pressure on ukrainian forces there in the east. and as it gets in a dauntless absolutely, rightly pointed out, russia is also a taking further north of div in marine car and in other places. so russia is attacking under several points of the front stretching ukrainian forces. and this is the critical point, because the ukrainian army does not have enough soldiers to fight back
a major russian offensive. so both sides are tired, but russia has appears to have more resources, more man power. both sides are tired and a does equal pressure on what you korean, and russia when it comes to soldiers, when it comes to troops and weapons, the situation is going back on would the sites? what, where do you see is a situation verse as of now that's really difficult to cough and then just because of my, as far as i have an interesting under it writing their own losses. and so it's really difficult and to say from india and that, and i might, are coming back to the nuclear rhetoric that this intensification of the nuclear rhetoric right now suggests that russia is really trying to use all levers to, to, to gain beverage. again, in this, in this current situation and to deter, or at least slow down further western support for your brain as we have mentioned before as well. so the suggest that russia is really trying to use all the tools it has to, to, to improve it said you would need to tackle the situation. well,
i think nato aspen or has been reacting very calmly to the nuclear rhetoric as well . and so i think that's good not to increase the risk further and, and to remain vigilant and monitor what brush is actually doing versus what it is saying and or react when that is actually required. but so far, nothing seems to change on the nuclear field in terms of the nuclear posture of russia and an on the battle grounded as important. of course, that western states continues a plane military assistance to ukraine as they are doing. so, nato is doing everything. it can germany, andrea britain, have kept their promises and delivered heavy bad dogs to ukraine for the 1st time since the war began. after much hesitation on the board of the federal government, 18 german lever dogs have now arrived in new britain. the british challenge dogs were also delivered, didn't had pledged 14 of them. these could be used in
a ukrainian spring offensive final thoughts or vill these tanks be a game changer? now i remember in the beginning you said that could be a game changer, but considering the small number, will these be a game changer? very briefly, we are coming to the end of the show. now also britain. remember that they are part of a larger package of military assistance and maybe the 8 in tanks, but by themselves will not be a game changer. but the advanced weaponry that is being delivered to ukraine as part of the starter package, including these 18 tanks, will be very important. and ukraine spring offensive if it comes from under you take these vessels, dance could help ukraine. now, if they are followed by more delirious, yes, but the number so far is not sufficient. this will, will be decided. i think my muscles not by things i messes. do you think that these western tanks could actually be the real reason behind the nuclear threat? no. i think it's more about long ranging missiles and altogether it's important
that the ukraine has or that ukraine has modern, tangs audi phones and long ranging reserves. it's about a package. it's about a back, isn't talking about real idols before you finish. now for belittles, it's quite a critical situation domestically as well as internationally, domestically both sure that more than a people's and off below from 0 against the idea of blessing. russian nuclear weapons invalid and internationally, belittles could actually face more sanctions than they would look at shanker risk it. because the question could, depends almost totally on put in. and because he controls his population to a very large extent. so it's so hard to say if there would be any protests and also something like a partisanship and so on. i think the possibilities of people who are against they are really limited. know, so does bella was even get to decide, or is the levels just following ration orders?
i think the crash angle he is known as a person was a, somehow leveling out something and going here to this site until the other side. but i think his options are also now very limited on i would agree that probably brother, his options are pretty limited and that this is probably a russian decision at russia seems to be or proceeds of being in its interest to. but also i, i would like to emphasize again that russia has not yet actually deployed nuclear weapons to better. so it really remains to be seen what actually happens on the ground. but some exports also said that it has actually been deployed there. and we're getting the news now. yes or no. is it even tactically, strategically possible to do something like this, which gets unnoticed? i would doubt that, but that really remains busy. and i can say no and cute reports suggest russia has around 2000 walking tactical warheads. that is 10 times more than the u. s. it is
not clear how many of these will be stationed and baylor rules and then they will be deployed. but buttons announcement test certainly rates and alum, what do you think is the nuclear risk rising if you're watching us on you drill, do let us know your thoughts. thanks for watching and good bye. ah with
deforestation is rising, while the government seems powerless. golden, 3000. in 30 minutes, d, w. there came with 2 faces. he was one celebrated as a beacon of hope and a reformer. now more than 20 years later, many people are disappointed mohammed the 6. does he still want a just and modern future for his country? and just how democratic is the king of the poor, really? in 75 minutes on d. w. o. guardians of truth, my name is john dinner and i have paid almost every price of being
a journalist in a country like turkey. taking all the powers that be they risk everything they want to kill me and they try many. ah, john dunder, asked activists, journalists and politicians living in exile to which what drives them too much on my shoulders. but i have to hold. they swayed because i'm responsible for the future. our country for the people behind the bus, the courageous effort against corruption and political crimes. in our series, guardians of truth and watch now on youtube. d. w documentary ah
ah ah ah doesn't stay that way. you news line from berlin. donald trump's lawyers negotiate the terms of his arrest. this after a grand jury in new york, a votes to indict him. it's the 1st time this is ever happened to a former us president. also in the program, the ukranian town of boucher a year after it's.