the, the, the nato allies distance themselves from the idea of sending troops to cab. as the french president says, he cannot pull out your pin boots on ukrainian saw it. must coast as mcclung doesn't realize the significance of what he said. the russian defense minister says a russian troops have liberated 3 residential areas on the, doing the upfront in one week. adding that ukraine in turn is using its remaining reserves to prevent collapse blocks instead of making a collective effort to de escalate the us. some of the gate have chosen the forceful response process. a foreign minister once that continued violence in and around gather will create additional political and military risk in the region. he says that during a meeting with the you have any prime minister in moscow,

the previous form has hit the streets across the new original for it is to stem the flow of teeth proceeds from ukraine. that's putting many locals out of business like from moscow. this is our t international. i'm a nationwide josh with the top star is this our nato champions, absorption bucks as the alliance is not considering sending troops through crain that comes and made reaction from russia to mac, runs suggesting that could be direct involvement in the hot conflict. muscle says such a move could lead to no good results, as we are well aware of mac cross position on the needs to inflict the

strategic defeat on russia and so on. we have noticed the facts and that the topic of sending troops to the crane was indeed discussed. we have also taken note that there was a very rich pallet of opinions on this matter. indeed, there is no consensus. okay, but it's a number of countries participating in the parents event. remain sober in their assessment of the potential risks of such actions and the potential risks of being directly involved in a hot conflict. well out of. busy all the leaders of all the natal member states macro on the is the only one who's suggested this plan, this idea that sending nato troops to crane to fight there is not off the table a table gets as well. everything was this cause this evening in a very open and direct manner. there is no consensus to day to officially openly and with endorsements and troops on the ground. but in terms of dynamics, nothing should be ruled out. we will do everything necessary to ensure that russia can not win this war. a book with

a reference for administer surgery lab. rob explain the reasoning behind the shocking proposal as a means for the west to try and compensate for the lack of results that the ukrainians are seeing on the battlefield right now. but at any rate, a proposal like this is enough to set off alarm bells, but coming from the head of a major western state, it set the main stream media into a frenzy with headlines, talking about potential world war 3 erupt. and what about other european leaders? what have they been saying? well, many of them are not happy about the tone of monday's meeting. we for example, heard from slovakia as prime minister who said that piece was not even mentioned they're like are just didn't put it was completely bull like meaning to support the war at all costs and to do everything you know, is it for the boys to continue i was very surprised that it was not a single was about any piece plan or piece of they should to. i can confirm that the all countries that are all ready to send their own soldiers to ukraine, all the say never so la case among them. they are also countries that say that this

proposal should be considered all governments, this piece oriented rejection, the continuation of the war will not sound weapons to ukraine and will focus on severely on projects of the apple settled in that same realm of thought. we heard from hungry is for administer, who said that there a flat outside of this country is not going to be under any circumstances sending troops to ukraine. this anti war message from still vakio and hungry comes as no surprise. what are we hearing from the other european countries in support of ukraine? well, even the more pro, key of figures, like germany's chancellor, the leadership of the european commission and even the secretary general of nato himself. they're all saying that they're not going to be sending troops to ukraine and many other nato states, or it's at the very least saying that the, the block is divided on this outline, this idea really, let's take a listen to what they said. there was a heated discussion about sending soldiers to you frame,

and there was no absolute mutual understanding on this issue. there are different opinions, but i want to emphasize that there are absolutely no such decisions. right now, we are busy sending advanced systems from sweden to ukraine in various ways. as many other countries are doing, it's a completely different matter. there is also no such demand on the part of ukraine . this issue is irrelevant. i want to assure you that there's no question of sending european nato forces inside ukraine. an issue that for greece does not exist and i believe doesn't exist for the great majority of our colleagues. and let's trip to the average citizen here. don't old. what has the reaction being from the french public to them across the states? but because, you know, sometimes it's usually a disconnect between the leadership what the leadership of a country wants and what the people want. what have you seen? well, it seems that people are just as afraid as the kind of fear we've been seeing. and these mainstream media headlines, a lot of stuff has been echoing between those headlines and what people are saying

specifically talking about fears of world war 3, sending french ground troops to ukraine. chrome is crazy, completely crazy. it would obviously be well with russia, world war 3, sending troops to ukraine would make us belligerence. war against russia would be madness. this belligerent verbal escalation by a nuclear power against another major nuclear power is already an air responsible act. emmanuel and the chrome explain vote, but it's our children's lives. he's talking about so callously. it's a question of peace over no country. now in terms of the actual idea of sending troops to ukraine, although there might not be consensus among european leaders. there certainly is a consensus among the general population across the west, but that consensus is absolutely against sending troops to ukraine. we've got statistics from polls here, sending us troops to ukraine, and people who strongly support that that's the only 6 percent of the population. well, strongly opposes 41 percent in terms of, of europe sending uh,

troops to ukraine. support for that in germany is 13 percent. i mean the highest we have here is in sweden 33 percent, which is still extremely low. when you take the population as a whole, so there's no doubt that there's very little supports in the west or among the general population for starting a potential world war 3. must assess such statements from the french president, raise questions about his adequacy, as anita and comments to r. t rushes for administrative spokesperson said parish, remember its own historical oppositions, and that's a, a beautiful white and what's 1st, just weeks ago, french president, my crown and his representatives, denied paris having any official role in recruiting volunteers or mercenaries. quite a few of whom were on ukrainian territory. and despite the facts presented by the russian side, in particular, by our investor in paris,

the palace denied it in every possible way. then the french president says he is considering sending his military to ukraine is one of the options. the question arises as to the adequacy of people who mix up statements. but it seems to me that the problem is much deeper than that. it is that people who are running things in the e. u in france now do not know. and in the context of parents do not appreciate their history. i want to remind mr. my chrome that there are other pages in francis history that would be worth paris turning to now and realizing in the 21st century . for example, the emergence and growth of anti fascist organizations. an enter french resistance to naziism during the 2nd world war. and the joining the citizens and all of civil society in france and the fight against naziism, against the 3rd reich, when it was not an official trans in france. this is what needs to be done now, to counteract the rise of naziism in ukraine. and we understand very well that enough facts have been provided to make even those who didn't want to believe it to

now believe it so whose side is background on what is this is ridiculous to attempt that hype to make a spectacular statement to gather more hits or is it just disrespect for his own heroes? the heroes of france, who gave their lives in the fight against nazi or some? yeah, those were connected to federal finish and b, like he says, the narrative is a sign of an escalating were of words which is the west reaction to rush of success on the battlefield. or what do i see that the war of words is escalating as fast as the russian troops are liberating the dumas region? the panic is growing amongst the wester supporters. they see that the grain in front lines are collapsing and the advance is very volatile. i see that the seas and has to be the bluff beats orchestrated very much from the frame size. we have seen the whole day. so one leader of to run out there are convincing their own

population that no, no, no, we are not sending our voice there. and of course that would be a madness. that would be a k is. so they are panicking out from their role and actions. what as being disgusting differently in france is basically another question, but looks like that the marker on has to take his own off the steps, trying to make the discussion maybe distort the attention alt, from the real games, what the russian troops are doing and to create the west hispanic gene, as they cannot do anything to prevent rush trouble, i need seberio or in the, in the battle field. they are trying to escalate to world war on the works. for more on the story, what cross live to nickel america, rich offer, and political analysts. thank you so much for speaking or was how would you explain the french president's message to what land. so when you think he's ready to go a listen today in france, not many people do understand what he's trying to express or what do you always

running for in any case, i think he's trying to do a bit of bravado. he's trying to incarnate some sort of a european defense or do you can position against russia. and this is, let's not forget that a couple of months ago. and people within the, i would say the western community were looking at metro. awkward, because he said that you cannot do it without russia several times in the past. he has said that we have to negotiate with russia and that russia will always be with the european countries. and now all of a sudden these past months, he's had a, he has a very strong rhetoric where it gets shot, and people just don't understand in a, in france he's been called and talked. so he's the president of the same time. so he will say white in the morning and then he'll say black in the afternoon or left and then right. and so not a lot of people understand. i think that he felt i would say that by having 20

leaders in the it is it's palace yesterday and at the end he'd split this 2nd slip out saying that may be the west may have to send troops. and we see already in the, in the media a lot of other countries who are represented in that uh uh and then that dinner yesterday or last night. i don't agree. and they have definitely not aligned themselves with my crossing that. that was not on the agenda, they don't agree with that. so i think this is some sort of macro typical one man show uh which is bound to backfire. right? one i show indeed because the lack of consensus just suggested macro may have gone off the rails by himself. what do you make of the immediate reaction coming out of a range of european countries rejecting plans to put boats on ukrainian? so what does it say about european consensus, the best time? there is no consent to stare. this is, i mean this is the fairly so you didn't get again an example of the failure of the european union. there is no consensus. there is no 4 in the diplomacy,

and there is also something very scary is that within the western, i would say governments today nobody is picking out piece as a child in most western countries you in europe today, you was, you will hear that europe is a belt because the goal was peace and that we did not want your countries to fight again, like they did the past and the 1st one more 2nd world war to try to tremendous atrocities. a lot of that, nobody's speaking about peace. so there seems, seems to be some sort of consensus against russia, but each country has a different view and a lot of countries actually don't. i mean, some countries actually say they don't walk with russia. so there is no consensus that you have few more or less stuff in this specific situation. and that's why somebody like macro would say something. so wild and crazy is putting boots on on the ground because they don't know they don't have a typical strategy. so they don't have a strategy for peace. and what do you see what michael said yesterday, and what some of his colleagues in other countries have said right after that? uh, i think there is no consensus to the war in any case. and this is,

this shows that there is no strategy, and it's for tray is a bit the european union as it had his chicken, which doesn't know, in which direction it's going. and it doesn't know concerning russia, as it doesn't know concerning agriculture, as it doesn't know concerning immigration vaccines. there's so many other subjects you can union. i think this is just underlining the failures of the european union to act as one unique political, organizational, political body. and what the scale of loss is august seen only ukrainian side. what, what sending european troops to ukraine mean a full scale of a concert there? what do you have any major impact? let's try and work things back and see what that would look like. so listen, i mean it is some specialized saying that it's different show me where to be deployed to right now. he could keep the border of about 80 kilometers and would have difficulties. and this would be using to $200000.00 a french military that we have today. it could keep aboard of a more or less 80 kilometers and what does not have that fire power to sustain the type of battle that we see in dumbass. you in france,

orders each year with the ukranian army spends in 2 days in concerning a missiles. and so this is, we're not ready for that. so, and also the french army has not been in such a situation military situation practically since the 1st world war. so it's, the french troops switched to arrive on location in ukraine. maybe if you take aside some some commandos, they would be learning how to fight by the ukrainian army, which is strictly losing against the russian army. so i think this would not help on the ground, however, the france brought miss house long arrangements out to the, to the a, to, to, to ukraine. this could change, especially if france brought other countries these long long. i would say there's a minimum establishing go over 500 kilometers. i would, i wouldn't say it's a game changer, but this could, uh, this could change the war. and also, if france puts boots on the ground, even though the front is already participating activity in the war, it can not be neutral. it is a belligerent in this, in this war,

it would be useless to think that russia at one moment, will not respond. and just consider this, an escalation after one moment. rachel will say, just sending this out as you're sending, just sending fine money. you're sending the ro is already french military helping the ukranian army today. this is maybe the red line that you've crossed and that you may regret. and as president clinton said a couple weeks ago, if through nato goes to work with men, not on the underground, and then the can only be losers on any side. because this will definitely become a major escalation of the war. and i don't think people in front of micro and realize how, how dangerous this step would be. and what about the public and all of this? how likely is it that your parents would be willing to be sent to find in another country for unclear interest? i was wondering this morning what a french soldier who joined the french army to defend french borders to defend france. what is he thinking, all of a sudden that he may have to go fight the russian army on the ground in ukraine, a country he doesn't know that by savanski was, was known to be a puppet,

to the united states, a who was known to be a somebody who was against freedom of speech, not, i mean, not really a line on the values we try to, to share here in france. and i think he's going to be in a quite a bad position because that's definitely not why he had joined the french army and looking on social media today. hey it's, it's co, practically impossible to find that person who is signing under his real name, saying that he, he backs his decision on the left, on the right. people are saying, what is this crazy decision? what's happening to michael was he's in the name of home is he's speaking, let me doesn't this a lot of people which have been like actually quite harsh on that kind of thing that these are words that you cannot hear. these that you can take like the, these are not the words definitely representing the french people. nobody wants what i mean, nobody, i would say not, but mass majority of defense. people don't want war. they want peace, they want a settlement. this is bad for us. we've seen how the sanctions have backfired against us on google. it could be a global economic situation into what is ought to be quite bad. we've got

demonstrations of, of pension funds, of farmers. the situation is already quite difficult. we don't need a war uh to, to make everything worse. so this is very popular and in a couple of months through going to be european evictions. and i think that's not for me, probably pay the price of such, i would say a radical violence of messages in the next selection. so this is quite a difficult understand, but definitely this is something which has made a very bad buzz for macro across the political spectrum today in france. and given the current situation, do you expect western leaders to pressure you're creating to entering seen stops? that's a difficult situation. i think washington will decide that before we have not here besides maybe a sequel window. so back here or of course or binding in hungary, we don't hear a lot of them would say european countries, presidents are prime ministers of voicing piece. this is a trick quite scary,

because so far they're aligning with buy it in their dining with the new conservative strategy over the united states of pressuring rush of, of, of damaging of her being the restaurant until the last ukranian. that's the position at the however, again we've got evictions coming up. we seeing the different poles that a lot of these people who are in government today a may have was a position of the political parties made it was. and if in the end, the next to elections, if we want to, to hear about peace, we need somebody thinking the white house who started speaking about peace. and this was this, well, i would say a show the path to unfortunately lot of what's the rulers, in your opinion, or not thinking about a sovereign strategy, their national strategies. we don't even have a strategy for us. i mean, the only interest for you up today as a continent is piece. this is obvious, the fact that none of them are advocating this and that they're all citing with bite and with the us since the 2014 cool and get a says a lot about i would say the independence of european dieters or wisdom your

teenagers today, so i think that if one piece we need, so we need this to come out from the, from the white house, or we have to have a really courageous pull of the cold. i would say, leader in government today, we're said enough is enough. we have to go to negotiation table and we have to discuss unfortunately there's not enough of that today in west a near and some of you can union and they cannot vacovich offer and political analysts. thank you so much for speaking to her. okay. thank you. and have a nice day i, the russian troops of strengthening barrels of positions on the, during the front. and after the successful capital of the city, they have liberated 3 more residential areas in just one week. total personnel loss is on the ukranian side of far exceeded 400000. according to the russian defense ministry, she was over there during the russian special military operation. the ukrainian armed forces have lost a total of more than $444000.00 service men. after the failure of their

counter offensive, the ukrainian military command is trying to stabilize the situation and prevent the collapse of the front at the expense of its remaining reserves. well, the russian defense minister was talking about the recent games made by russian troops down in i've d. s good in particular. and he said in general, russian troops have been gaining more control of the don't ex region. he talks about the size of the controller and said since the beginning of 2024. so just this year, the russian troops have been able to take an extra 327 square kilometers of territory . just to put you into context. what that means that is larger than the size of an ease state that is the state of malta. he also talked about of ukrainian dead saying that soldiers, they were laughing at losing more than $800.00 individuals on a daily basis on average. and therefore, as you heard and not quite,

russia was estimating the total loss of ukrainians. so this is some 444000 individuals since the source of the conflict back in february 2022. that is very different to what we heard from ukraine this week. president zalinski saying that the law says was 31000 individuals. i'm but it's not as much of that saying that there's a huge disparity here is actually the fact that there are a lot higher. we heard from the washington post back in 2023 saying it had sources within the us government that was already pushing the loss is if you creating soldiers and around a 170000. so you can see that there is a huge difference to what you claim is pushing out it towards probably is a reality on the ground. what he also heard that this was the 1st time the russian troops i'm unable to take out the american fm's tongue. now adds to long list of

military equipment, the russian soldiers have been able to political right on the front lines from the beginning of administration. i'm as some what i needed to the fact that the numbers are incredibly no 31000 compared to what the defense ministry is saying. here is 400000. what all the topics being he report on. he also talks about the threats coming from potential nuclear missiles we heard reported in the u. k. just didn't the last few days that the us could be putting the missiles back on you k territory . once again, if it does so, that will be the 1st time in 15 years, as they have been us myself on you, kate territory. and the defense minister also talks about the all the threats that are being faced at the moment. as you are just as of now, the actions of washington, which is building up its nuclear potential on the territory of the european countries and deploying advanced means of delivering nuclear charges,

are provoking radiation, chemical and biological threats. in addition, the united states has formed a network of biological labord tories to study the properties of pathogens and the particular region that can be transmitted to humans and cause pandemic. out of 330 such facilities around 40 are located inside ukraine. he also talked about the issues in the south pacific saying the need to have increased its exercises in the region and also its presence in the region that and said that as a result rusher is having to do what it needs to do to protect it. c, easton boat is question for for those the washington continues to use the rising 10 sions on the korean peninsula and in the area of taiwan island as a pretext to expand the presence of its military forces in the western pacific

ocean. this year, the scope of joint exercises between the united states and this allies is expected to increase due to the military potential of nato member countries forces to as well as a result of that they will be increased equipment put down into the eastern own. so they will be more training, you know, for service in the east and rush will also be carrying out international missions with several countries, including a lout, vietnam, and india. the escalating situation in the middle east as let the discussion between the russian foreign minister and the many prime minister in moscow. on tuesday, saturday lab robe expressed conviction that the many who the shelling of commercial vessels and the red sea was larger. the consequence of these rarely policy and conflict written, you know, we do not condone to showing the merchant ships, but we also cannot justify the aggressive actions that the united states and the u

. k. are taken against the chairs are of the republic a pm and on the bed protects without any international mandate in the form of the un security council. resolution that did not allow it to report minutes as i grade level over the course of the last 3 months. has issues statements highlight of his position, but more problem with highlighting bosco's position on this matter. a letter says that the united states, along with the united kingdom, are currently defined international law as opposed to an expense. this is not really nothing new point of moscow that the united states have being nice to have some means to justify an intervention. so that intervention cannot be military intervention more so it can include the bombing of the stage or the southern states as well as the people, particularly young man that has been in the comes from a contract for the better part of the decade. which really highlight some of the kinetic german crises over that period as well for ministers, that grade level and that the money problem is on the but it has to discuss the

number of possible outcomes. i didn't get many satisfied with things like no for this law. this is what we've got. many tried me to say i have to say who i'm and i thought for us, we suppose the palestinian people. they have the right to have their own independent states with a capital in east jerusalem, and we will work in this direction to mitigate the consequences of the humanitarian disaster that we're now witnessing happening. that there are a double standards applied to this situation. then we in the m and taking a class stance in regard to the palestinian issue, and we shared the russian approach to that issue from. this is best document that hasn't been issued over the course of not just the last 2 months, but over the past 2 years or even longer, back to the united states or the connected west hasn't been involved in some sort of double standard. we're double sandra suggests that leaving by standing at any given time is by without the theme do force of international law or the y security council carry out strikes or even wage war against the states. so the united states

and it's for a position turning out these attacks would not necessarily benefits on the people of young man or the state of the not for the most part, wouldn't even put in funds to this conflict variable, the man to big through the stands in that sense, who the say that's the policy and policy is for the most important cause i'm unless side solve badly, we cannot talk about a piece of bill or a stop or section of activities. but most certainly is the russian position home with natalie as involved as a samsung washer is currently as big as a mediator. despite the impressions from the united states, i'm with united kingdom trying to ensure that this conflict does not spill over products under your su, sorry, good luck with the foreign minister when you look it up the pretty to finish that if we haven't really weren't that continued violence in and around together strip will create additional political mil to risk in the region. but instead of making a collective effort to de escalate the us, somebody you can't have chosen a forceful response. is that a level of last month issued

a statement suggesting that the united states or the collective was physically interested in a go shooting. and that statement, he said that according to these diagnostics and the development and some of these dynamics besides the general sense of the west has been extremely negative. and what is getting worse or truly suggest die? so the less the how interested in negotiating and that based potentially slight role often and you know what works before. lots and polish farmers are expanding their protest against the translates of ukrainian grain. they've announced the plan to organize a blockade lithuanian border on friday activist. save in ports of ukraine, of goods are a threat to local producers in the country, a loss and no stand. those are imposed on products from ukraine, which means that production costs. there are much lower and we can not compete with this prizes at all. to do football, so you simply cannot be that are farmers have to produce less and that ukraine, by the fact that there is a war imposes,

its prices and its screen are people wants to live to what is, what is the impulse of grain from ukraine has a negative impact on us because it distorts all markets. we have large stock, some grain in warehouses, that we are able to exports. and if all market is this to buy the import of rain from another country, we cannot even sell all grade to all mills or field processing plants. police farmers have been located in the ukraine border for several weeks. they're angry, this some ukrainian products, translating through poland are being sold on the local market protest as a demand doing of something of e u. green rates regulations as well as more subsidies and compensation from a forward is fine as opposed to being rolling and even clashing with police and several other european countries which are affected by the same problem. the.