ah, ah ah, ah, this is al jazeera, i'm 30 and i'm again with a check on your world headlines. ukraine's president says evacuations from your call have been put on hold because of reported violations of a cease fire deal by russia. the town is one of 2 regions in ukraine where forces are meant to stop fighting to give residents a safe passage out. charles stratford has more from up a retail, which is also in the south. the city has been bombarded increasingly heavy shilling in recent days. we know that there was a russian military advance from the west. also pushed by what we believe was

a push led by the russian back separatists in the east of the city. we've spoken to members of power, military groups in mariel, in the last 24 hours. you describe a city on the siege. they say yes, that there are huge areas without electricity, without water. and what we can only envision our scenes about so panic, the marianna city council was told people to go back to their homes or go back to areas of shelter. we know that they were buses or we supported that there were buses laid on to get some of these people out of mariel. today that now seems as if it has been cancelled. ukraine's president vladimir zalinski has criticized nato's or few refusal to create a no fly zone over his country. he says the alliance will be to blame for any further death and destruction. ross has foreign minister has hit back a zalinski speech, accusing him of wanting to provoke further conflicts to sloan vocalist rules are

still not there. it's zalinski. so unhappy with nato not interfering than that means he's hoping to resolve this conflict by involving nato. it means he's not hearing statements from european capitals, saying they won't get involved. it means he wants to provoke a conflict between nato and russia. that's the mood he's in. this mood indicates that he doesn't need negotiations with us, but that may change because of course, he's a movie person, or many ukrainians are continuing to flee to neighboring countries. our correspondence ambassador, avi, is at a crossing on the ukraine, poland border. we've been here since the beginning of the conflict and the mister blinking is likely to be here to come and see what's happening. we still don't know exactly when, but when he arrives, what we are expecting him to see is really an illustration of what many say is perhaps the truest

a picture of what the cost of war actually is. civilians as always, innocent civilians paying the highest price for the global brinkmann ship of world leaders. we've been speaking to a several volunteers here. i'd like to speak to a woman now who's been here for several days helping translate helping to board the helping people. puzzled lillia when thank you for talking to us. you've been for here for a few days. you said that this is one of the busiest times you've seen since the beginning of the conflict. can you describe a little bit of the scenes you've seen of the work you've been doing? okay, said the, i feel like when they just arrived at what astonished me is the number of children and women coming, crossing the border. and it's really struck me a day at the very beginning. i was quite emotional, but then i needed to change my mindset to help those people. so it was yesterday that we saw the biggest influx of people at this boy there a week i was loading people for a good to 12 hours in the,

in buses like this and, and yeah, it's been really hectic. i am definitely sleep deprived. but thankfully, there's a lot of volunteers. i am really happy with the fact that people mobilized this much and came to help. we have french medics. we have israel medics. we have canadian medics coming here just to help out. and that i think that is beautiful. actually this of a push of people crossing the border really is an ebb and flow. it's like, it's like a, it's like it's keeping pace like a heartbeat with events on the ground in ukraine. and if this is any indication, the circumstances across the border certainly are ratcheting up quickly. and we will likely see more and more people push across into the border and into poland. because of the headlines on out to sara, we'll have more news coming up right after the bottom line. thanks for watching. bye bye. oh,

hi, i'm steve pennington. i have a question. as the war in ukraine gets uglier, will the massive global sanctions now imposed against russia and many russian oligarchs, and vladimir putin himself work. let's get to the bottom line. ah, in response to the russian attack on ukraine, the u. s. in its allies have chosen to punish it in part with financial weapons. the plan in theory, at least, is to cut the russian government from its hundreds of billions of dollars in reserves and shut it out of the global financial system. sanctions aren't to new form of warfare. the u. s. has been targeting iran, venezuela, north korea, and cuba for decades. russia itself has been living with lower level american thanks and since 2014, when it annex the crimean peninsula from ukraine. but russia produces huge amounts of gas and wheat and other global commodities,

which give it some leverage and russian gas is not affected by the sanctions right now. but at least one senator joe mansion of west virginia has said it's time to unleash the real economic atomic bomb which is boycotting russia. few imports to the united states. so concessions actually force russia to change course. or do they just make life miserable for the average russian citizen? while the government finds other ways to fund itself? our sanctions just a way to fake action when there are a few other options to stop a power play from happening. today we're talking with lee jones professor, a political economy and international relations at the university of london. he's the author of societies under siege, exploring how international economic sanctions in parentheses do not work. and then david asher, a senior fellow at the hudson institute here in washington, d. c, who's been an advisor to the u. s. government on sanctions evasion, including economic warfare, campaign strategies against the islamic state has belie in lebanon and iran. david, let me start with you when have sanctions work?

what are the characteristics of making sanctions efficacious? particularly in the cases, we're looking at russia right now, but, but looking at other historic cases. yes. see if they, they worked effectively when they're part of a campaign of a broader policy to disrupt or, or affect or even deter a state or society or trans national organization, a terrorist organization, drug cartel, for example. i at rob reagan had economic war campaign that he founded in the form of a national security council document, 92 that became the center of a massive effort by the u. s. government to disrupt the soviet economy. no one seems to remember how much impact it had, but it was absolutely central to the fall, the berlin wall, and the change in the soviet government toward modern day russia, which of course is how turned back toward the soviet union. we it,

we would be wise to remember what, how it worked and what it accomplished and to try to re a vive certain aspects of it. because these, that the goal there was to make life difficult for the leadership to disrupt their is their center of gravity. their thinking, it wasn't just, it wasn't at heart, the russian people. oh, the most detrimental action that we took. of course, if you've read the unclassified or now declassified documents was the explosion of the russian far east pipeline to pipeline the very pipeline to this, to dave feeding gas into western europe. i'm not advocating that, but in 1982 in a 3 that was the option that hadn't been completed. it wasn't yet connected to europe. and the registration saw the value of making that disconnection palpable. so you know, sanctions was that was not a sanction. there was an action sanctions work in the, in the best form when they're combined with the varieties of

a variety of overton covert actions. i think right now an issue i have is we just have a sanctions policy. we don't really have a broader policy yet. we're starting to, thanks to the reaction to the tyranny and the oppressiveness of what's going on in ukraine. do you think vladimir putin have surprised you think his cronies, the oligarchs around him, have a price that deterring them freezing their assets. ah, collapsing the asset values around them matters to these people. there is a price in my mind towards putin's reputation in his mojo. you gotta look at him like tony soprano, the famous my boss from the t. v series. i'm guy lucca john gotti. i was involved going after a guy named john. got you as a major. you were you were you helped go after john? god, i was the avi, i went up. they gambino crime, family writ large. mom and i went after the synagogue drug cartel under chapel

guzman. and we had a similar sort of theory of operation. we had a concept that we could create a situation where they weren't able to ha, basically tend to the needs of their inner sanctum. we complicated their, their command control, communications, their reliability, and the dependability. as bosses and it's called value based targeting, i did the very same approach towards a kim jung il in north korea, the previous leader. i was after going after all the going after all the things that really mattered to him. we came up with a very detailed assessment in 2002 of what mattered to keep him alive as a leader. and we attacked every one of them. and that worked quite well until the administration decided i was too successful. and they said, you know, the, with the warrant, iraq, that i was going to create a regime change in north korea, which is what i had been ordered to do. but, you know, not, not kinetically, but the point is, i think there is a, there is

a way to effect vladimir putin. it's not just money though. it's a lot. there are a lot of things that need to be attacked is beyond money. and so sanctions are just the piece will lead jones, a really appreciate you. joining us from london, you've written it variances, paper saying sanctions won't save you crane. and the, and the subhead line is they are a comforting illusion in a leaderless war. it will give us your understanding of sanctions policy where they work, where they haven't worked. i think you just heard is right. this is the academic evidence. they'll suggest that sanctions alone, i'm not very successful. they work me about 5 percent of the time when they're just deployed on the rowing and when they're deployed. alongside other meshes, the general consensus in the academic research is that they work about 30 percent of the time. so they still have about 2 thirds of the time. and i think one of the reasons why they fail so often. i mean there are many ways, i think one of the key ones. if the she just been discussing whether there was

a pride. so there is an underlying logic to sanctions, but if i can manipulate, you know, cost benefit analysis. if i can create additional costs for you, then you will revise your cost benefit analysis and rationally choose to change your behavior. and what we just heard is that, that works against drug cartel. so the logic is what it should also work, split the lead to the difficulty is that i think political leaders are not like drug cartels. they're not business. the primary goal is not to make money. they have a whole host, the other object goals, which are not necessarily convertible, $2.00, and so on. so it becomes quite difficult, i think, to say, okay, let's just, you know, wrap up the costs just a little bit more and then go be able to tweak their cost benefit analysis. because i think what, what we've seen in history is many regimes willing to endure really quite colossal

economic costs in order to prioritize securing political and security code. so if you type the, the case of north korea that's just been mention, sanctions against north korea have not been successful in the sense that the north korean regime has been willing to, into isolation. reputational damage, poverty among its own population, its own in order to secure nuclear weapons, which it beliefs are essential to the preservation of the regime insecurity against attractive united states. we saw the also in the back the ba'ath party regime and the set out he's saying was willing to forego certain objectives. i was willing, this bible, we were told him 2003 to disarm it. weapons of mass destruction. it was willing to withdraw from, from wait an issue at p, reparations, but it was not willing to just abandon power. it was, it would rather see fractions in the, in the regime in the see the criminalization of the state,

the impoverishment of the population before it would relinquish power. and it took troops to finish off the racing. so when it comes to the may to, to what we have to ask you made it primarily motivated by his own junior re interests. right? he's probably your bank balance, and i'll do the all the galks around to promote really interested in that. and all the, you know, 70 percent plots of people who vote for him or they motivated regularly by that early bought. or are they going to prioritize the political and security goals above that peculiar interest? and if they do that, then they can pretend potentially be quite severe economic suffering on the rushing side without it leading to the outcome that we want. so we have to be able to tell a plausible story when we impose sanctions. what is the plausible link between imposing economic pain and the political game that we seek?

and these, there are plausible causal story. we can tell if there isn't. then there's the risk that we just impose hardship without getting what we want. david, what is your reaction to that? because i agree. i mean, people to understand ations can. i've never approach sanctions like this on off button or faucet. you just turn off the hot and cold water. it's never been my approach my approach. it's always been a not coercive diplomacy as they call it or stay craft. my approach has been absolute pressure, containment, destruction deterrence and disruption. it's not about playing soft power games, which i am afraid is how like we're, we're right washer. you know, i don't know who it russian, who i know and, you know, and he's a brilliant young fellow not too young anymore. but his view, i think, is that this is the somebody you use to modulate a behavior. i have no doubt that it will not modulate behavior if anything,

what we're doing right now is probably an accelerate putin's decision making cycle . now that might be useful though, because he's building his own quagmire. okay, so, but that's probably not what they're doing. okay. what i'd be doing is i would be doing things to affect his sanctity, his inner sanctum, his peace of mind. i be using economic warfare as a part of warfare. you know, when i went after this, when i had this problem, they said this city at his, at campaign you know, with general mcfarland as our combined commander, sean and i went to war against their finances. and we literally bombed the central bank in mosul, where the money was blew a 1000000000 to 2000000000. i think about $2000000000.00 in cash. bagdad, he cried. okay. and i think algiers perfect viewers will respect that. i mean, we literally, you know, picked him up on the radio and he was screaming in horror. his, we just blew up his money. i mean, it was not about trying to change his decision making process. his decision making

process like couldn't was set. we had to destroy his his, his mojo. i guess you want to call it. well, let me ask you to balance our mojo, david, because part of it is, you know, exceed, oh, like dara pasco for audience. melinda pasco is a major global aluminum tycoon. michael friedman, who is the chairman of alpha bank and, and the c u of letter one living in london, a ukrainian russian has come out of strongly critical of this war and conflict. and so it begins to raise the question of whether or not the pressure that's being created around. so the people around couldn't begin to create a dynamic that changes his i can't, i don't think it's gonna change, put in to you. yeah, i think it's going to lead to potential alternatives to put in in the future. i mean, you've really got to think ahead with it. we, when reagan imposed his pressure strategy, which is well beyond sanctions, we did have sanctions, but they'd been long standing against roger and i t to it was about it bringing

down the berlin wall. i mean, literally this, the berlin famous berlin wall, bringing out the wall speech was all linked to the national security policy decisions that worse surrounding the economic warfare campaign against the soviet union. we gave money to solidarity to rise up in poland. poland, we gave money inside russia to scientists who were a refuse next in, and who came bright to rebel against the soviet system. and we encourage massa defections including of some of the smartest people in the country who were related to their economic system. if you look back on some of the things i was involved with, the north korea, you'll see some of the same hallmarks. i mean, you know, a lot of smart people left it and then the others were killed. and i'm not saying i kill them, but they just died as part of the process. this was of really tough approach. it's not nice. i, you know, we, it's, it's not just, you know, we're gonna turn the sanction off. we're creating permanent conditions. the break

or band or, you know, undermine a regime and that's what we should do if we're going to go to economic ward putin. when he understands economic war, i'm afraid, right now we're reaching the sanctions. like we have all the cards and they had none. they have a huge ability to counter attack, and we haven't seen that yet. i'm low, surprised. i think women's been a little he's is he by we're going to probably see huge cyber attacks against our financial system. and you know, i don't know where kids are prepared to lose a 1000 points in the stock market. you know, in the nasdaq raise and really important point i want to throw back to lee jones is do we do? do us citizens in the u. k? have a price, do american citizens have a price in this, in this process as well? i mean, you, you said something very important that i, i have already heard reports about malicious malware. ah, having impacts both in europe and the united states. because when you launch mall, where did the system it can have in it, but whether it was, you know, consciously targeted at, at the u. s. or not. but there are, there are these questions, which i think lee jones got right. which is,

which is the price that those that are trying to defend against aggression are willing to pay, or whether they're willing to acquiesce your thoughts. li, well, i think you're right. i mean, it's a very interesting thing to say because i think that's quite a different view of sanctions to i think the mainstream of policy making certainly in europe other things as much desirable or weight along the part of most of the powers. and perhaps also the united states to combine sanctions with much wider suites of coercion because it measures i mean it's not possible to physically bomb the russian central bank, for example, that we are a very dangerous point. if we're heading into a confrontation with nuclear power, and i think that the hasn't been very much clear strategic thinking about in heading into this crisis. because the russians have made that position by which is that they're not willing to tolerate the emergence of nato states on the board this

. and they've been by georgia and 2008 ukraine, 2014 to illustrate how serious they are. and i think they take position you in a position has been fundament required, and big us on the one hand that no said will protect the ukraine on the other hand . but having said that, you won't protect ukraine sorted into the big us position, which has kind of been bolden the ukranian government to say that we're going to join later. we're going to join, you further antagonize russia. so on the one hand, they haven't accommodated rushing security interest, but they haven't done enough to fully deter rusher even. and so that's been a sort of lack of clear strategic thinking here. it's a real strategic, landrum, westport, i think. and then when it comes to functions in suddenly the population and certainly in the, in, in europe. i think it's fair to say sure about united states. but i suppose it may be true that to the 1st time that we've really thought about what, what does it really mean to engage in those, in

a really serious confrontation with, with russia? are we really going to go to war for ukraine? i mean, the government to have a plan that's not going to happen when push comes to shove, i'll be willing to go to economic bull with russia. i think that's also really hard . so population, because the big way that you can really damage, you know, cause the kind of wreckage and carnage that they've been talking about. the way that you could do that with a brochure to sanction their energy exports, comments for nearly 60 percent of their exports when you are the oral guessing coke . but europe is heavily dependent on impulse of oil and gas from russia. let me, david, let me jump to you and ask you, do we understand where the consequences should go as sanctions are bandied about as a tool, which both of you have said and have dramatic impacts, not just on the leader. it or maybe not even on the leader, but on society's a whole me look yeah. what, what, what am, how did i meant economic historian and

a proud wander? not many of us in the world, a graduate of oxford, or did my doctorate and dumb. i have studied the blow back from sanctions as well. i'm at the disagreeing with li entirely at all. i mean, people, people don't quite, they think of me as mr. sanctions and i've been involved and sanctioning that huge number of entities in my career. probably more than anyone in the u. s. government, except mac ballpark morning was her out a actually. so i've been around through a democrat and republican government, so i've not just been a partisan. i am. there is a cost a that can occur and blow back. you can, you can also, you blow up yourself in this for all of sanctions. you know, when we sanctions to japanese in 939940 their oil enterprises in their oil or our oil exports to them and from southeast asia, it led them to attack pearl harbor. okay. there's no doubt about that. when,

when we were after milosevic, we in id 8, it would have very clear concept for operations, which was in a matrix, literally called operation matrix. we had all these different attack the f vectors . we went after the people that some of that were against them and we built up the people that actually went after the people that were supporting him. and we helped the people that were against him. i mean, we know we play both sides, built one side up against the other, and then we attacked his finances and literally went to cyprus in 1998. and i think was in the spring as i recall and told the cypriots that they have $3300000000.00 and milosevic is money and either they freeze, freeze it and cut him off at the knees. or we were in a cut off cypress. and he had a separate government did without having even a legal basis. they cut off those which in, you know, about 6 weeks later, as i recall, he fell from power. he came that he really walked in. okay, so there is a history of course it sanctions working, coerce of sanctions. so is different than course of diplomacy, right? this whole idea, you can just use it as a diplomatic tool. i've rejected that. i've used them as of as

a type of containment tool as a deterrent tool. um, but not really for a negotiation, you know, like, you know, raise the cost on a gangster so that he quits, being the gangsters is not going to work that way. we can do is you can raise the cost on his survival. so that opposing forces come to bear. i mean, it's it, you know, i, when i go to economic war than adversary, i go to war. i don't play around a li, i'd love to get you in our, in our final minutes, to share with us. if you were to correct those mistakes and create a more efficacious sanctions regime that could have traction in a case like we're seeing in ukraine. what would be the elements of that that you would suggest? i think you have to start always with an analysis of the target society. because you could take functions that succeeded extensively in one case and copy them in a word for word dollar a dollar to another case. and it would have a completely different outcome because the political economy of that target society

and the political dynamics in that society. a completely different so people often talk about south africa and say, well, the sanctions works so they can work in case x, right? but that's not obviously not the case. south africa, very unique set of circumstances that allowed sanctions to play some kind of role. so we have to look at a target like busha and say, okay, let's assume that we're able to design sanctions that can impose serious economic calm and russia without ideally, blowing ourselves up, as david says, which is quite hard, given how dependent we've become on russian commodity export, or even if she was the logic, how is this going to change things in russia? is it going to split the pitch in regime? all that, i think are into probably defections from the regime from the military. the, all the gods going to use. i was to him, it's any of this remotely plausible,

and it seems to me an arm and not rushing that should emphasize that. it seems to me that peyton is highly popular, enjoyed the popularity rate, the 69 percent last time he invited ukraine. he's popularity, rating increased or 20 percent. right. it looks to me like the elite thing saying the united behind him, you know, full 100 to one. in the do you mind face or recognizing the breakaway republics. that he was able to dress down his spite, chiefly on live television for bluffing his lines at the right of the stage money security council meeting. you know, pay to me, you say as a non, especially there are many in the practice that sanctions could exploit in short term. that's the causal story that we need to be able to tell. right? isn't also that by inflicting economic pay, we're going to get the political game that we want. and if not, then potentially we crate in a very wide spread right offering. but without getting what we want to thank very

much university of linda, professor lee jones and hudson institute senior fellow, some people call him mister sanctions. david asher, thank you both for being with us today. this was terrific. thank you. question. so what's the bottom line? there's always a debate about the nature of power. is it military force, or is it economic strength? the debate about sanctions has similar, or they useful or not useful to some sanctioning russian president vladimir putin, whose launched a war against the neighboring country is pathetically weak. but as mister sanctions himself said today, there could be power in targeting players who violate cor, international stability and acceptable codes of conduct. other countries will try to expose fries in a race, the personal assets of these rulers and their cronies, who use power to get rich or use their riches to get power. but it's lee jones reminds sanctions don't always have a good track record as a tool to change the behavior of governments. 10 years ago i would have agreed and

said sanctions are feckless. now. i believe they are an essential weapon in the arsenal pointed at the world's most reckless. and that's the bottom line, ah, from international politics to the global pandemic, and everything in between. it did not respect poor people and pure our planet promised to ensure the safety of women. what happened that doctor 15 got pulled back, that people actually have more feel. why is the u. k, so hostile to try and see if the mysteries all of us join me. if i take on the live with man or the misconceptions and meet the contradiction, carmen get up front on al jazeera, chiron hunt is a 2000000, stray dogs, many in a terrible state al jazeera well for those, those help me to save him. and the remarkable journey to rescue lady august all the

way after have a good role with ben it which takes an unexpected turn. very difficult to search for her. yeah, these are for a stray dog on al jazeera. ah, this is al jazeera, i'm danny and abigail with a check on your world headlines. the cranes presidents has evacuations from maria paul had been put on hold because of reported violations of a ceasefire deal by russia. the town is one of 2 regions in ukraine where forces are meant to stop fighting to give residents a safe passage out. charles stratford has more from upper roacha, which is also in the south.