it's landed just a few meters from all convoy some of the positions of the live all over the need for region. and each for a st totally destroyed along the road we came in on there was still clearly an active battlefield day without. is there a for the latest development? ah hello, i am emily anglin, in anto hi headquarters. these are the top stories on al jazeera sh. 10 humanitarian cardoso are open in ukraine to allow civilians to play cities including mary paul keith and new hans. several previous attempts at opening humanitarian cardoso have failed each time keith and moscow have blamed each other for breaching the terms. let go, rosalie all, maria paul residents leaving the city, including on foot, are provided with the necessary assistance from today. they will be brought to pro johnson by bosses. please be careful because the corridors are extremely difficult

to open. the enemy insidiously disrupts our agreements. so please if you have the opportunity use it today. russian forces, meanwhile, have now entered mary paul, where several buildings have been reduced to rubble. stephanie decker filed this report from western ukraine from above. mary paul looks like it's had the life sucked out of it. people's homes now frozen in time, eerie carcases, of war, and on the ground. even the dead get no peace. it's too dangerous to bury them in the cemetery. often lying outside for days from what those left alive can make sense of this war. richer to request the world of my mother in law born in 1936, she survived the learning grog, cj russian passport on had walker of russian federations fishing industry. but she

is lying, those killed in the bombardment of being buried in the grounds of their homes. something they never would have imagined while living here. now the little girl nibbled when you go quiet. it's disgusting. i'm not going to blame anyone. i'm disgusted. i'm scared and i'm cold, it's a horror. i have never expected this to happen in my life like mm. oh, this video has been uploaded by the chechen leader rams and cad here of fighting for russia, claiming this is an attempt to evacuate civilians. but most efforts to evacuate civilians from here have so far failed. for 3 weeks, russia has assaulted the strategic port city. tens of thousands of traps here. and nothing functions, any more you williams. louis looked up. what wonder for you? we spent 2 days in the basement. she's a sick woman who had to sit on a chair all that time awful. she wouldn't survive. then the men came on,

the helped you carry around who we are here, all bundled up with blankets. it's very cold. we just want to go home woman, young faces still manage a smile in these unimaginable time soon she finished. so good. everything is going to be ok. she tells her children, it will end soon. vladimir putin says, russian forces are not targeting civilians. the ground, the reality tells a very different story. stephanie decker al jazeera in western ukraine. russia's defense ministry says it's been destroying ukrainian military vehicles with high precision weapons. it says it's used to hypersonic missiles the 1st time since this war began. although that cannot be verified civilians in odessa, a sheltering in old mines as the city braces for invasion, russian more ships have been shelling the suburbs of the port city home to more than a 1000000 people. ukraine's president followed me zelinski,

criticized russia for glorifying the invasion and moscow stadium rally on friday. so mc said it's in everyone's interest to begin. meaningful pace talks to avoid high losses in the war. in other news series, president basha, l. a sad has visited united arab emirates. it's his 1st trip to an arab country since the war began in 2011. the us state department called the visit a profoundly disappointing nearly a 1000000 people in a team or have voted to choose the next president. race in opinion polls suggest a former president and nobel peace prize. laureate jose ramos horta is in the late . he's facing 15 other candidates and the results are expected later on saturday. those are the headlines. i'm emily anglin. the news continues here on al jazeera after the bottom line. ah,

me. hi, i'm steve clements and i have a question. so far. president joe biden has drawn a red line about direct military confrontation with russia. but it's the war and ukraine rages on. is america going to change the definition of read? let's get to the bottom line. ah. as of right now, there's no end in sight to the fighting in ukraine. we're seeing the hor, of war in real time, with all its human rights violations and the grueling bloody reality on our big screens and our small screens in the past 3 weeks. more than 3000000 ukrainians have fled to neighboring countries, talks for a cease fire between ukrainian and russian negotiators do go on, but so does the warfare. the u. s. in the european union support ukraine, but they refuse to enter the war directly. and president joe biden assumes that there's really 0 appetite among americans for war. that said anti tank and anti

aircraft missiles, real time intelligence, and other weapons and supplies and support are still flowing from the west ukraine, their massive sanctions against russia. but america officials still want to avoid 2 totally separate economic groups in the world. one led by washington, and the other by china and russia. in this situation, escalation is easier than many want to believe. and that potential for escalation could be exactly the deterrence that affects putin's course. so will biden's succeed at keeping the war at arm's length or willie us find itself drawn in as the only way to block rushes expansion. today we're talking with ian bremar, the president and founder of the erasure group, a global research firm that focuses on political risk, his latest book, the power of crisis, how 3 threats and our response will change. the world comes out in may and margaret peter lynn, who served at the u. s. state department is chief of staff to former secretary rex henderson and now teaches law george mason university. really glad to have you both with us in let me up. start with you, i want to show you

a tweet here. it's from president biden. he is tweeted out, we will make sure ukraine has weapons to defend against the invading russian force . we will set money and food and aid to save ukrainian lives. we will welcome ukrainian refugees with open arms. my question to you is you look forward and you see the likely scenarios. this is the united states president saying here the here, the areas where we're going to provide support where we're going to be engaged. there's a lot not said what are the most likely scenarios you see as we look forward from this point out? well, the interesting point is that compared to all the crises you and i talk about steve, this is the one that so far, at least there's been the most general agreement across the political spectrum in the united states. i mean, both democrats and republicans in congress largely agree that you want diplomacy to succeed, but you need to as strongly as possible. i'd be willing to hit the russian economy harder if they are not willing to back away from their invasion in ukraine. you

want it to be multi lateral. you want it to truly be a consolidated policy with all of nato allies on board. very much unlike the way they bind, orchestrated to withdraw from afghanistan. you also want to provide as much capacity for the ukrainians to defend themselves. as possible without bringing them into nato, without providing direct troops for the americans to defend ukraine without doing anything that potentially brings american troops directly into fighting against russia. so frankly, i mean, no matter where the stows going forward, that has been the policy. the big question we have, of course, is how putin responds, given that anything he does is going to put him in markedly worse position politically, economically and in terms of national security than if he had never chosen to invade ukraine in the 1st place. as my graham, the support and pro, and you talk to some of the world's most powerful people, you talk to. oligarchs, you know, russian strategists and thinkers and academics and officials in the government. we

see the russian economy crippled and we see regular russians cuz i, i, i know some as well really feeling this. what are they telling you about hooton's choices? how he's feeling this is a deuce get a sense that there's any effect here that matters well. a lot of them, i leave it, i mean, you know, if you're russian and you had a good job that just got shut down in the tech sector, the finance sector, you have the ability to get out of the country. you get mad, died. we're focusing of course on the $3000000.00 ukrainians that are refugees and that is the human story. but the fact is that the russian economy is going to be crippled, both by the sanctions and the knock on effects of the sanctions. now, i would not say that any of this is likely to bring down putin in the near term. i mean, in the united states, in the same way that 70 percent of trump supporters actually believe he won the election because that's the base hooton's bases. the entire country and russia and 70 percent of russians actually believe that this war was basically instigated by

the ukrainians and by nato. and anything that's happening in the russian economy is therefore, is our fall. they do believe that, but there's no question that this economy is getting crippled because of decisions that are made by putin. there will be more demonstrations on the street so far they've been mostly non violent, has been up $15000.00 russians that have been detained. those numbers are going way up and who can can't be happy about margaret peterson. i have been looking in this, you know, talking to many analysts who put the red lines about what america and it's nato allies should do in a different place. you wrote a piece was very powerful in, in a place called the skiff. and the title was every minute we failed acton ukraine is another minute we get dragged into a worsening war. and, and so you're, i get the sense that you're not satisfied with the steps forward from the biden team, yet, what do you think are the right policy actions now? well, i have some satisfaction with some of the things that the biden ministration has

been doing. i think it's great and i agree with ian this should be a multilateral response. and so i think all of those steps are useful. i think that there needs to be an acceleration. i think that the decision about not supporting the transfer of the meg should be revisited. and i wanna explain it those tell the on his way that the transfer the mig fighters from poland. yes. that poll and delivered to a nato bass and the united states originally looked enthused about that. and that said no deal. yeah. so i think diplomatically, there was probably a quieter way to accomplish this. and i think sort of the public negotiation inside the coalition was probably not helpful to getting the megs delivered. but i want to talk about the on the ground experience. russia has about 772 fighter jets. the ukraine has less than 10 percent of that they had about $69.00. air superiority has been important since a 100 years. and so it,

when you listen to what zalinski is asking for, he's asking for either a no fly zone, or he's asking for help in air superiority that anti aircraft missiles and for the high flying bombers. and in addition to the anti artillery that we've been giving, so i think that there are still tactical, significant support that the united states can provide. and i think that makes are an example of a 28 megs. is a 40 percent increase and era power for the ukrainian people in i love to get your sense of that because when we were debating this question about holland's role, these megs, we, i'd say says make these makes these russian really made planes, i guess it has been in their arsenal, and i think part of the question is, you know, what looks like nato involvement. what doesn't, why is an anti tank stinger missile that is phone over and given ukraine any different than a piece of equipment that flies in the year via ukrainian pilot?

look, there was an active debate inside the bi demonstration, inside the high levels of the white house as to whether or not those megs would be provided will be supported. i agree with margaret that it's not useful to have that diplomacy publicly. this was one of the few missteps that the alliance together has had. another one was would mc cron the french president called putin and didn't tell biden or anyone else who was going to to in advance. there are a couple of points of that where they've been mistakes, but i mean, compared to the afghanistan, i mean, this is like a different administration. it's an a minus compared to a d. i'm. so let's be clear that you have to find exceptions to where the alliance has not been acting in coordinated fashion. given the level of defense of support that has been provided to ukraine, given the extraordinary amounts of intelligence support has been provided as the disposition of russian forces on the ground given the extraordinary and unity of the sanctions. the economic sanctions that we've seen, my understanding specifically on the maze, is that there were a lot of people inside the white house that the believe that those makes would

never fly, that the level of russian air superiority meant that you could send them. they'd have symbolic importance because you're given zalinski what he wants, but it wouldn't have mattered until the disposition of forces on the ground wouldn't have helped the ukrainians much. i'm not a defense expert, i'm not gonna weigh in on that. what i am going to say is that right now you have 3 east european heads of state that are visiting kiev to support president zalinski while it's being bomb. that's extraordinary. and the reason that is possible 3 weeks into the war is because of the units unified and strong nato response. it never would have been possible if it hadn't been for that. and that creates an opportunity for more people to go to kia, were more symbolic support to help demand that a ceasefire, at least for kiya be implemented. that's a level of leverage that has been directly facilitated by 8 combined u. s. e u nato policy. and thank god for that, margaret

a no or dimension of your article. ah, that i found fascinating. i happen to be reading a biography of churchill. ah, and you know, on my nightstand picked up your article and read and said, well this is a church chilion perspective. and i remember that churchill was doubted in his time that in the united states, those that were thinking about the need of american engagement before, you know, during world war 2 was doubted by saying that we have a, you know, both of you had said there's been a strong bipartisan leadership response, largely supportive of each other, but that doesn't really encapsulate the whole picture that we have a number of americans that don't care about ukraine that don't see benefits to being engaged in the world. how seriously do you take that? and if someone who worked for republican ministration, several republican administration, what do you think needs to happen among republicans? if anything, to reinforce the notion that being engaged in these issues like ukraine today,

really matter to the future of this country? well, i think one is to remember that it's a historical to suggest that we're not engaged with ukraine. so in the u. s. s r fell. it was 1990. at that time ukraine had the 3rd, the world's 3rd largest nuclear arsenal. they had 1200 nuclear warheads. the united states was heavily engaged diplomatically and at the highest levels in convincing ukraine to return those warheads to russia so that they could be discarded. and at the time we gave them security system assistance about a $175000000.00. and so my view is that it's one thing to formalistic li, say, ukraine is not in nato. there isn't that piece of paper, but in some ways there's a little bit of a common law marriage between us. and that's not just a west bailey, in comment about democracies. it's a common about our role in condensing ukraine to give up those nuclear warheads.

our role in giving them security assistance at the time our role in accepting ukrainian truths and the afghanistan war. so these are people we've never seen at the party before. and so my own view and, and i appreciate that the, the comparison to churchill, i, i have to confess, i don't hold my liquor as well as he does. but i do think that the united states needs to acknowledge that we have been engage with ukraine and it would be a historical to suggest anything else or something you wrote recently in that was powerful for me was you know, some of the myths about this, some of the things that will not happen, not just will, one of them said is that, you know, a nuclear exchange is highly unlikely to happen. there were various other dimensions of direct nato involvement. highly likely not to happen. i love to get your list of things that you think that maybe we in the meteor mischaracterizing or hyping and ways that we should be more cautious about as we approach just because, you know,

i, i have been trying to ask myself and having to reassess actually you know, some of what i thought was possible in an encounter like this is the kind of thing i expected russia to be the best in the world at hybrid wor, little green men, cyber take down. turns out we're watching this plan at a very, very different way. what are some of the bubbles you think we need to burst in our discussion? i'll answer that, but 1st i want to respond to margaret's very good points on the level of commitment the americans did have historically to ukraine, were talking about the budapest memorandum, 1994. they got rid of their nukes, the americans, the u. k. and the russians all committed to support ukrainian territorial integrity . the russians have obviously rip that up even more in the americans did, starting back in 2014 when they took crimea and pieces of ukraine. but the americans have pretended that there's no importance to that. that's a problem and i think going forward, we have a big problem which has been in europe the europeans actually believe correctly in

my view, that this invasion of ukraine, a country of 44000000 people is, is actually an existential threat to democracy. broadly speaking, i think the americans do not feel that way. i think the americans feel like this is a threat to ukrainian democracy. and the danger is, as we get close to american mid terms, as we get close to the 2024 elections that the american start focusing again, inwardly on it's biden's fault, trump is coming back as the president. we can't beat committing to europeans. we're focused on the united states. we're not having refugees here. this isn't our problem. and if that happens, existentially the trans atlantic alliance is for, for more vulnerable. but you're right steve, there are things that aren't happening here. cyber attacks that aren't happening, i think aren't happening not because the russians have no capability, but because so far they don't have much targeted capability. so when they use the big malware to hit ukraine, the last time the not petty attacks,

they hit ukraine really good. but it also affected a whole bunch of western assets in almost for example, brought maersk the shipping company into bankruptcy. and my believe is the reason that you haven't seen those attack so far is because the russians have been careful, but not widening the aperture to hit nato countries directly. the more that russia takes a hit, the more this feels existential russia, the more they will be willing to swing at those countries. you seem one american citizen, a female professional basketball player, arrested on a trumped up charge on in russia. how many more of those might we see for nato countries? how many citizens of nato countries would be arrested, would be sent to jail, would be potentially even torture. we've seen that in china with the to michael from canada, absolutely. risks with russia. what on disinformation going forward? they've done with the brakes. it a referendum or with the french elections of the american election. that's going to come back with a vengeance. so there are lots of hybrid issues of warfare that the russians

historically have used against nato. that one would expect in this environment who would be willing to do yet again. or thank you that margaret and, and, and i won't ask you both something and i don't know how to frame it. of this am i get it kind of wrong, which is, you know, sometimes can we afford our principles. when you look at oil and gas, you look at dollars and you look at also human rights and, and democracy in the world. you kind of look at the mix of all of those i see as to day warming up here and there to venezuela. ah, we're trying to warm up our to iran, which is of course and other major oil producer. but oil and energy and gas really do matter in the world who caught, you know, some, some could not take the strident steps that may be the united states is because they're dependencies. and there's another side we've kind of been looking at sanctions and the economic impact. so i guess my question is at a time where we have the iran deal in the wings, you know, sitting may be coming back. maybe not. you've got attention with venezuela out there. we have china sitting in this kind of interesting tightrope,

walk between its interests. what do we have to do with these other problem countries to actually contain our challenge with russia? or do you think america in the west or okay can take on everybody at the same time so i'm happy to go 1st i'll be interested in eons response. i. i don't think it's a matter of us taking on everybody at the same time. so i want to, i want to argue a little bit with that question. and that's because we are a nation with alliances. we have the war war to post war war to alliance system to connect to. it's why the united states had concerns about the nordstrom to deal and why the pipeline that the germans were much more comfortable with in the united states is comfortable with. we've seen as a strategic error. so i do think energy reliance is a global concern and it's also a geo political concern. but i think the united states is in

a place where we're starting to better understand that we need to manage that globally. and so i think that there are solutions that we've talked about the trans caspian pipeline and one of them. so i don't think we have to take them all on in the same way. and i think that what we're seeing and i want to address the, the sanctions connection and the energy connection. i agree. they have been unprecedented sanctions in a period of time. that is impressive. my. the information i have was that we're about a 70 percent cut off of the russian economy that needs to go higher if we want to withhold direct military engagement than i think we need to full throttle the sanctions. so i think we need to move up from luxury goods and vodka to, to really encourage europe to make the kinds of decisions that the u. k is, and that is getting out of russian energy. thank you. get your response to that as

well. i know you think about these traded commodities in the world and how, you know, the, the gas in energy picture is also one that has to be solved. how do you think the vitamin ration is doing and that number 2, but what are the new ripple effects that we're going to have to take into account? you know, as we look at some of these other parties. so i think it's more important to maintain complete unity of nato on this. even if the level of sanctions are a small bit less than to have the americans go well ahead of the europeans and lose a bunch of the europeans in the process is obviously a balance between the 2. you'd like to get both if you can. but if you can't, with dozens of countries, i air in favor of complete unity, and i think that's where they've been going so far. now it's true that under bush, under obama, under trump, and under biden, they've been pushing, pushing, pushing so hard to get the europeans to spend more in defense, particularly the germans. by the way, the germans, not only are now moving towards 2 percent of g d p defense. ben,

thank you. not bye. and thank you, not trump, but thank you putin, but also they're the ones that are taking far more economic pain because they're the ones that were so dependent and are so dependent on the russian economy. and they're doing that willingly proactively because they understand the direct threat of russia. that's what collective security is all about. i don't hear any one the united states complaining that the europeans are taking more economic pain and americans are because of the sanctions. that's a sign of a good and durable alliance. now, on iran, i don't think there's much to look at here because trump coal, unilaterally, out of the iranian nuclear deal binds, wanted to get back in it from day one, they're still try to make that happen. if it happens, it's basically the same deal. it used to be rush just trying to stop it from happening. but even the chinese don't like those high energy prices better than even chance that the same old deal comes back. venezuela, i think, is a mistake by biden. it's taken a long time to get the entire group of latin american governments to work together and refused to recognise an illegitimate dictator in mister madura reading that

country right now, sending a high level delegation to talk to him, maybe to get a couple 100000 barrels of oil a day back on track. i wouldn't do it personally. but right now the american see, this is the top priority is russia and anything they can do to get other oil on the market? something the trying to get not real quick question of both of you. does china pick russia as it's long term partner, or does china pick the west if it has to make a choice in? i'll take this one for sure. china picks russia because she's in pain, has already picked russia and that country is run by one person and he would have to completely flip flopped it take to change that. i don't think that's gonna happen. but china does not want to be tied to russia in a cold war. the de couples their economy from the advanced industrial economies, the g 7. so they are going to tried very carefully to avoid that yesterday. you had 7 hours. jake solomon, national security council advisor with

a young judge young to jo from his counterpart in china. if very little read out on that meeting, right, the next few days i would expect an announcement of a biden. she video call that happens. we're on track to try to keep the stable if it wasn't, that's very bad. morgan, i mean give you last word on trying his choices, which ways trying to kind of go. i agree with the and i would make one small amendment. china picked to russia by ross is, should know china takes china alone. and so i don't think that there is an alliance there that you can expect. i always say supreme leaders have a hard time working with one another. they don't flock. well, i want to thank you both in bremar founder and president of the erasure group in margaret peter and former state department official and current assistant professor of lot. george mason university. thank you so much for joining us today because yes, thank you. so what's the bottom line? it's easy to believe that this is just

a war between 2 countries with just mostly emotional effects and some economic effects on the rest of the world. but what's on the battlefield now is the future, the world order. for starters, what happens to the idea of the nation state putin is actually threatened to a race, the lines of a whole nation. is that gonna stand? what happens to be large? he gets away with it. what will stability in the world look like then in the future? i don't buy the hype of some american media that talk about the imminence of nuclear war. but this is really a time of huge risk. one mistake on the ground or in the air could lead to unpredictable escalation with really deadly outcomes. and even the best outcomes in this case, are going to be horrible. missiles don't have to be falling on our buildings down the street for us to realize that what's going on in europe now will effect this all for years to come. this really matters spokes and that's the bottom line. ah.

with some of the world's largest reserve near here provides much of the uranium that fuel here at nuclear power. but at what cost, people in power follows the uranium trail from the dead to the source of the mediterranean and investigates the devastating effects on the planet and all those who inhabit the industry of uranium to on al jazeera frank assessments for china will benefit from the 0, call the strategy if the rest the world to get informed opinions at all on sundays and friday from the critical debate wide report, the claims that need to come do an interest in your threat to russia. but it's precisely, he's actually that created the insecurity in the region in depth analysis of the danes global headlines inside story on al jazeera. ah morning allow government al

jazeera as a, you know, i hello, i am emily anguish in audio. how headquarters? these are the top stories on al jazeera, 10 humanitarian cargoes are open in ukraine to allow civilians to flee cities, including mary paul, keith and new hans. several previous attempts at opening these cargoes have failed . each time keith and moscow have blamed each other for reaching the terms. let me all mario full residence, leaving the city, including on foot, are provided with the necessary assistance from today. they will be brought to pro johnson by buses. please be.