el salvador sick to boston, lewis has seen women incarcerated for years. some say their only crime was the devastating stillberg an empowering story of one woman's struggle that ignited miscarriage of justice. a witness documentary on al jazeera ah 11 o'clock and all the top stories here on al jazeera, ukrainian president flood amid zalinski, is urging his people to continue the fight against russia. he's pleaded with the west for more aid in his pushing for a no fly zone. nashville, in that order these, that us, we will not give out country to the invaders, a mot, ukrainian people in every occupied place. go on attack, counter attack was you have to struggle,

you have to fight my concur song for dance. you have to go out and chased them out, clear this evil from our land. a russian president vladimir putin, his warning, any country that tries to impose a no fly zone of ukraine would be a participant in the military conflict. it comes as russian forces continue. they're pushed towards keith. a russia has that resumed it's offensive on the strategic port city of mario poll. it comes after a temporary cease fire failed. both sides accusing the other violating the terms. the agreement had been put in place to allow civilians to escape the fighting by the smith. as more than that from jeanette's, the russian defense ministry says in coordination with the ukrainians. it established a humanitarian corridor on saturday between 10 am and 4 pm, to allow civilians to leave mary awful and vulnerable her these 2 strategic cities that are surrounded by russian forces and fighters from a dentist and le ganske people's republic. but the russians say the ukrainians

continued to shell these corridors. and so it wasn't possible to have this for the sci fi to be effective for civilians to leave and fight. according to denise pershing, who is the leader of the de nets people's republic. he says no civilians were able to leave van of aha. now he also told al jazeera that the reason he called in russian force is to help in the fight in don bass against ukraine forces. because the british in america, americans particularly had been arming and training fighters from ukraine and they feared in, in a non exc, and la ganske that they were about to be invaded. but ball chillers ball. now what happened is that at the end of last year, the west started active support of armed forces of ukraine. they started supplying lethal weapons and lots of aircraft from the us and britain, and hundreds and hundreds of units of armaments. they also supply the government of

ukraine with instructions over a long period of time. and our intelligence was reporting that manpower, armaments and ammunitions were being moved towards the demarcation line with us. as important to point out that mary apo unvil nova her form part of this historic province of dumbass in ukraine that are done at school and were ganske want to be part of their republics, republics recognized by russia, but at the moment, the forces rondon, etc. and le ganske, when vladimir putin invaded ukraine, the only control about a 3rd of the territory that they lay claim to the ukrainians had about 2 thirds. but that of course is rapidly diminishing as a do next can lugens forces advance with russian help. but mary, apple and villanova are critical areas for don bass. the united nations predicts the number of people fleeing the war will reach one and a half 1000000. in the next 24 hours. your sector state entity blinking,

met with some of those who have already fled to east and poland. $3000.00 refugees are taking shelter at a shopping mile. that's now serving as a reception center. visa, mastercard, say there suspending all operations in russia and that is effective immediately. it means transactions for cards issued within russia will not work outside the country . and cons issued elsewhere will no longer work in russia. the international monetary fund is warning. the global economy is facing a very serious consequences from the war in ukraine. the 2 countries supply a 3rd of the world's wheat and a major exporters of barley, corn, and sunflower, oil rushes that national carrier error, says that stopping all international flights from tuesday, except those headed to belarus. russian federal aviation agency says there's a high risk of aircraft being sees because of the ongoing international sanctions. york state with headlines re got more news coming up here. announce zera right off

we go to the bottom line. ah hi, i'm steve clements and 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 new form of warfare. b 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 annexed 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 mentioned west virginia has said it's time to unleash the real economic atomic bomb which is boycotting russia fuel imports to the united states. so can sanctions actually force russia to change course? or do they just make life miserable for the average russian citizen, while the government find other ways to fund itself or sanction is 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 of 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, dc, who's been an advisor to the u. s. government on sanctions evasion,

including economic warfare campaigns, strategies against the atlantic state has below, 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 ron 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, their center of gravity. their thinking, it wasn't just, it wasn't that hard to 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, the 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 is mojo. you gotta look at him like tony soprano, the famous my boss from the t. v series. i'm the guy luca, 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 toward 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 to say that i was too successful. and they said, you know, the,

with the warrant, iraq, that i was gonna create a regime change in north korea, which is what i had been ordered to do. but ah, 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 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 when you just heard is right this, the academic evidence does suggest that sanctions alone, i'm not very successful. they work. i knew about 5 percent of the time when they're just deployed on the rowing and when they 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 issue you've just been discussing, whether there is a price. 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 drugs cartel, so the logic is what it should also work again, 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 to have a whole host of other objectives and 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 the political and security code. so if you type the, the case of north korea that's just been mention in sanctions against north korea have not been successful in the sense that the north korean regime has been willing to endure 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. so insecurity against attractive united states. we saw the also in iraq, the ba'ath party regime under his saying, was willing to forego certain objectives. i was willing, this bible, we were told in 2003 to disarm it. weapons of mass destruction. it was willing to

withdraw from, from way to an issue, recreation. but it was not willing to just abandon the power. it was, it would rather see fractions in the, in the regime across the sea, 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 maybe 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 is there a 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 we are we want to rush, you know, i know and you know, and he's a really young fellow not too young anymore. but his view, i think,

is that this is somebody you used to modulate a behavior. i have no doubt that it will not modulate behavior if anything we were doing right now is probably an accelerate prudence decision making. oh, 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 yes, think algiers is perfect viewers. of 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 puddings was set. we had to destroy his his, his mojo. i guess you want to call it. well, let me address your balance our mojo, david, because part of it is, you know, exceed, oh, like their pos, give her 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 some of the people around putin begin to create a dynamic. that changes his i think it can, i don't think it's gonna change, puts you. yeah. i think it's gonna lead to potential alternatives to put in in the future. i mean, you've really got to think ahead with it when, when reagan imposed his pressure strategy,

which was 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 po and 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 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 going to turn the sanction off. we're creating permanent conditions to break or band, or, you know, undermine a regime and that's what we should do. we're going to go to economic ward putin, when he understands economic war. i'm afraid right now we're watching 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 the yet. i'm low surprised. i think women's been a little ways is she by we're going to probably see huge cyber attacks against our financial system. and i don't know what americans 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 mall where, ah, having impacts both in europe in the united states. because when you launch malware

to the system, it can have in it. but whether it was, you know, consciously targeted at, at the u. s. or not. but there, 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 or 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 nato position you in a position has been fundamentally qual, i'm 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, it's 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 clear that not going to happen, that when push comes to shove, i'll be willing to go to economic bull with russia. i think that's also really hard for populations because the big way that you can really damage, you know, call it 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 export comments for nearly 60 percent of their exports when you are the oral guessing coke. but europe is heavily dependent on imports 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 i meant economic historian and a proud one or not many of us in the world, a graduate of oxford, or did my doctorate and jem, 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 mister sanctions and i've been involved in sanctioning that huge number of entities in my career, probably more than anyone in the u. s. government, except mich ballpark morning was her out a actually. so i've been around through a democrat and republican government, so i have 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 pro harbor. okay. there's no doubt about that. when we were after milosevic, we in $98.00 with a 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 but they 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 in 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 you 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 use them as of as a type of containment tool as a deterrent tool. 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. well, you can do is you can raise the cross 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 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 russia and say, okay, let's assume that we're able to design sanctions that can impose serious economic, common russia without ideally, blowing ourselves up, as david says, which is quite hard, given how dependent we've become on russian commodity export 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, 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, right. 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 loving 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 one. 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, an app that sees for the blind and a robotic arm for the disabled. a young australian engineer is inventing tools to help people gain independence or side of that will put the ability to recognize objects, all the firms so that people with revision would be able to recognize every day of jack women make science, robo girls, episode full on al jazeera,

we don't simply focus on the politics of the conflict. if the human suffering that we report i, we brave bullets and bomb and we always include the views from our sites. with ice caps melting in the north pole juice, climate change. china is ramping up research and investment in the region. 11 east explores china's rise in the arctic. on al jazeera ah 11 o'clock at the top stores here on al jazeera and ukraine, president vladimir lensky is urging his people to continue the fight as russia's invasion of ukraine enters its 10th day. well, he's busy with the west for more aid and is pushing for no fly zone yet please. nashville in the road is that us, we will not give our country to the invaders. ukrainian, people in every occupied place go on attack.