spy, who's on the throne divided into ears and epochs. despite all these celebrations, there is something of a bitter sweetness that perhaps we are now in the final pages of the era. queen elizabeth, the 2nd is a seeming contradiction that a modern parliamentary democracy still has an other elected hereditary head of state. this is the kind of country britain chooses to be with queen elizabeth stubbing for stability and continuity in uncertain times. leave barker al jazeera london, more than 3500 beacons are being led across the u. k. n. it's overseas territories to mark the cleans platinum jubilee. queen elizabeth tre, get the 1st beacon from her home at windsor castle. it eliminated a large fries culture covered in light of buckingham palace in london. higgins will also be late in the capital cities of old commonwealth countries. ah,

no, again, i'm fully battle with the headlines on al jazeera u. s. president joe biden has delivered at an impassioned address to the nation on gun control after a string of mash, shootings is called on congress to restore limits on the sale of assault sy, weapons, and raised the minimum age to buy guns. rival size in yemen, civil war have agreed to expenditures for another 2 months just hours before it was about to expire. the u. n. n u. s. have welcome the move in or encouraging a permanent p steel. it rains. reson says russia now occupies a 5th of his country. ukrainian troops are locked in grinding battles with the russian army with frontline stretching across more than a 1000 kilometers. and the wells leading oil producers have agreed to increase their output. opec members and their opec past partners will add 640000 bouts per day in july and august. the latest posts will compensate for a drop in russian oil,

which came after sanctions on moscow following the invasion of ukraine inside stories next. there was ah no, no, not a be of them, with an honest with me. most of us the new for those. and we said that the home, and a lot of we're going to give you to what he said or to, well, the home, the put up with me all the de la multiplicity yet obama, those awful booking for this, this week. i know you're the one i don't to call the dealer. mm. i

will see. bobby house. i don't want a shooting abuto to look ah, staying neutral in the face of conflict, many countries decided against taking sides in the russia ukraine war. but what does neutrality mean? and can a nation truly avoid siding with either? this is inside story. ah

hello and welcome to the program i mammograms room. many countries have decided to avoid taking sides and rushes invasion of ukraine. 35 nations abstained from voting on a un resolution condemning the conflict and russia's president demanded ukraine be declared neutral as a condition to ending the war. but the concept of neutrality is under question. the invasion led to finland and sweden that had long been militarily neutral, applying to join the nato alliance. india is officially not aligned with either russia, ukraine, but it has faced criticism for doubling its imports of russian oil. even switzerland, known worldwide for neutrality, is debating its meaning. media report say the government, veto german and danish requests to supply swiss made armored vehicles to ukraine as that would violate switzerland's neutrality. but the country followed much of the

west by imposing sanctions and freezing russian assets. in february, the swiss president said neutrality doesn't mean being indifferent to aggression. boom, hobbins you saw in sheet. why did we take this decision? will kristian, other democracies must be able to rely on switzerland, states that stanford international law, you must be able to rely on switzerland and states had uphold human rights, must be able to rely on switzerland, stoughton. the federal council examined the question of neutrality under the slight playing into the hands of an aggressor is not neutral. it was not. all right, let's take a look at what neutrality means. it broadly means not taking sides. an armed conflict between war and countries and abstaining from providing military assistance, countries interpret neutrality differently. for example, finland and sweden are more relaxed about their status and describe themselves as non aligned. whereas neutral countries in europe are bound by the policies of the

european union. most countries declare their neutrality, while some are permanently neutral by either constitutional decree or as part of a previous treaty. during hostilities, a neutral state may repeal change or modify its position. ah, all right, let's bring in our guess. joining us on the line from new delhi, happy mon jacob, associate professor of diplomacy at your how long their role university and founder of the council for strategic and defense research in zurich, mark for author and adjunct professor of sociology at the university of zurich. and in oslo, glen decent professor of international relations at the university of se, norway, a warm welcome to you all and thanks so much for joining us on the program today. mark, let me start with you today. um, there seems to be some confusion out there when it comes to the concept of neutrality. so i want to take a step back for a moment and ask you about the difference between the law of neutrality versus the

politics of neutrality. how those 2 things differ. as a tough one. well, i can speak most with perspective because switzerland is obviously known as maybe the 1st or no the only statement in the world that has been tried and tried and it's very constitution. and that goes back actually a long time. there was a battle in 1516, but in yano, where the switch, you know, we're trying to over extend themselves and are warriors still have a vatican guard today. member mercenaries. and after that kind of bitter defeat that they had there, they came to the conclusion that that neutrality will be a better option. this is only enshrined really after the counsellor vienna 18. 15 counselor paris. and then later, as you probably know, the convention den haag 97 and so on. but it is something that comes naturally to switzerland because it's a country kind of approached here in middle of europe, between testing hours,

you know, taking sides of the costly affair that on the wrong horse. or if you're caught in this sort of cross hairs of these and contented powers, and that's also why with them became of course, the center in the world for diplomacy and neutrality. then it's inter, really linked to the piece that we've had. it's woodson, prosperity and other countries then look to switzerland as a paradigm. but today with this new conflict of course, is all in danger and question. but the legacy of it is basically to keep out of these conflicts, to preserve one on stability and to act as a platform for congress and peaceful competence each. glenn was the concept of neutrality, interpreted differently in the past, say, during the cold war era or during world war 2, was it interpreted differently in the past than it is today. well,

my colleague suggest it is interpreted in different ways, i guess during the cold war it was mostly it was very much defined as being part of the blogs in order to reduce the attention of this all taste. and that's why we saw in europe during the cold war. we had some neutral states inland, sweden, austria, switzerland, which kind of creat another buffer, a song and making germany and only from pile. so i think it, we will link more to membership in military lines. as of course, neutrality also comes us not taking sides in any conflicts such as providing weapons to one side during the war. but i think if some of the ideas about the child was obscured after the cold war, it's common to argue now that the child is only on the us, 3 months began to come up,

but it began to collapse as soon they're out there after the cold war because well there was an absence of kim security architecture, so we saw that and nathan began to take on the role of representing europe. so nato expansion is matrangela became the main force for what they referred to as european integration. so neutrality, effectively, the men to be marginalized from the only security architecture there was on the ultimate. so the whole idea of the child has changed them up during the cold war era, which is why we also see that there's been collapsing over the past 30 years. mark, i saw you nodding along to some of what glen was saying there, and it looked like you might have wanted to jump in. so go ahead. well, just footnote over, i think we all agree, but it is a debate in switzerland right now because definitionally no trial, the many non military intervention and other testing with sanctions is, is that

a military intervention or not? or does that violate the law and trinity, which is trying to, this was constitution. this was constitute not explicit on this military intervention is, is the red line definitely. and so, delivering weapons to a conflict zone has traditionally perceived in, seen as, as something prohibited bytes was us was, well, mark, let me follow up with you on that point. because, you know, as you mentioned, i mean is which will and essentially is having its neutrality tested somewhat publicly. right now, you know, there is this debate over swiss neutrality. it's been intensifying due to the war in ukraine. the fact that swiss government signed up to the sanctions on russia, you know, as you mentioned, some viewed that as a sign that switzerland is abandon it's neutrality. is this debate is richland, going to grow? are we going to see more lawmakers bringing it up a talking about it? is it how, how much is the public involved in this debate right now? while that's a very good point, because all these decisions were made top down with our recourse in the public and which was the only direct democracy in the world. 7 constitution,

the people are the sovereign. so at the end, if there is a referendum, they can overturn any decision made by the federal council. but the federal count, unilaterally decided to its essence violate towards the new trial of switzerland. i was just at a footnote to, through the cold war. it's not true that was entirely neutral, even before the, during the cold war, it always was deciding, you know, with, with the u. s. incense, and also you remember, 991 when participated in the sanctions against iraq. so people forget that may be a little bit, so there is a precedent there that has been, has been said by my colleague, certainly after the cold war. certainly a soft thing of this whole thing. and which one has a partnership with piece, with nato. so even though it's not a member of nato defacto kind of is, so you know, all the use. another example, switzerland decided the people decided to vote against membership and you, but the tribal council of all kinds of doors to the you that defacto became

a member of the and the same. now the sanctions here. now the quote you're right there is probably this continues. if the federal council say, or tomorrow, decided to deliver, you know munitions, to germany and then to the crane the mark. then i think there will be a national referendum or initiative. now how that will turn out is another question or some people that are or against, but i think it will come to that eventually because trial t is something sacred to a lot of was not all, maybe not even to majority, but a lot. this was one of the happy my, let me ask you, india is not officially aligned with either russia or ukraine. i want to look for a moment at the difference between neutrality and non alignment. how is one different from the other? thank you mama for asking that question. i think this is all fun. be sent by a lot of people globally as to what is in the stands when it comes to some of these issues. as you know, he started to be able to get defensive. i did 47,

it has claimed to be known online follow up as not aligned with either the soviet. busy or the us for 2 years, except when of course, it was a credit that i q a sense of security. so what example doing the $971.00 wall between india and pockets on all the bonds a dock signed a piece of french offensive with united the us us up. but watch part of the house name that if you don't mind, now you ask me the difference between no, not by the way b, c, you try to mean that you don't take a position on any extended warranties issue. you know, lots of, i think you can do stuff. i think you have no opinion on that. you don't take

a decision on that. you don't to act on act on a donor line, but it will be that even generally, you are not aligned with countries not aligned to either of the 2 blogs. but you will continue to have an opinion on what is happening. it will continue to take a position or take an action. it's on national interest. we can, if you will, have known the country off each obedient. what you have done, basically that in gender, to be on another line to any, to any of the cost or the, any of the cost out there. but we will take a decision on a particular issue based of the bait it off the circumstances off it. but i think that is a very significant sticks to do understand because it is not a huge power in the out, you know, getting you know, to build up. there are a lot radius. otherwise, i think for the active on the global, seen talking about, for example, the colonizer said no update on the order of the cold war exit with an active power

. at the same time, it wasn't northern lion. so it was not a beautiful quality, always hoping in a book for the solution. if the, the, at that in the korean, what is the korean water, for example? so he doesn't know that you did not aligned to actually order new but happy ones. let me also ask you, i mean india has come under a lot of pressure by countries like the u. s. and other western countries to try to change that stance when it comes to russia and ukraine. do you think that there's any scenario by which india would actually take a stance against russia invasion of ukraine? i can be the pin in bailey, was that when the water begun by the russians, you couldn't be imagined that this was going to be quick. why i think much of the project believed that to be the case. like for example, be that back like i could happen in 2040 so that the assumption that have

to be completely erroneous. so if this was this for a very long time, if this is going to lead to monetary inside the ukraine, i believe you're probably going to look at a lot more pressure on both internally and externally to change its opinion on what's going on. let me, let me also sort of my argument by saying that there has not really support or there actually was for example, 2014 has that, that both sites have made interest media has not made that made that argument in 22 and 22. if you look at the explanations of what the cost of the and the about the general assembly in the has made the argument that it is important to warner, the master also want to be guarding. so when it is important, the extra is not a good idea. yes, made all the correct argument vision in its explanation and refuse to let's say.

busy what against your number? yeah. so it, so by not condemning that one would make the argument that would be a suck to be right now. it is suddenly brought, i should not because it likes what she has doing, but because of the political environment, you know, you're looking at it really difficult why i'm actually you know, putting pressure on. so i think to answer your question, but i think if this was well becomes a better yet better would be lot of pressure on in, in generally that the, i think there was, i'll be at glenn going forward. will the countries that maintain their neutrality still play an important diplomatic role in finding political solutions to conflict? or do you think that their influence will win? well, i think their influence will begin to decline because there's hardly any more neutral

countries in europe, i think. and with it's now that sweden and finland, especially house, argue that they will join nato. i think you will see less and less of this. and they will seem to be participants of the conflict. and by taking sides, there's also less of a diplomatic role. they can have, which is why we see more of a diplomatic role and has, having been shifted towards turkey. now turkey, officers, natal member and, but still you see them to having more of an independent foreign policy and open list a thing. for example, they're not going to join in on the all of the sanctions. so i think that the, the decline on the child will definitely have an impact on, on the, on, on, on the diplomacy. and the ability to motifs knows have to be said that i think i think that the client and the child is also not just promot preventing diplomacy,

but also provoking on conflicts and war. and, and i think in finland, my might regret this disposition, because keep in mind what, what's happened to you, and i think it's often a common narrative, not that you could, if you could have been in nato, then there wouldn't have been a war. but i think in reality, it was the u. s. a. nato efforts to and, and ukrainian neutrality eventually pro russia. because we see what the ukranian experience was from it's independence on the present coach maps. the whole idea was that they should never join nato with alec project and joined with russia. then it would be fine. but without russia, they would be frontline against russia that was undermined them to charlotte. these are the tried to be in ritual until the color revolution in 2004, when this was the western back formation, willing to nato expansion, and then relations to them. period until 2010 when you like for them. ukraine. again, push the idea that he was a neutral state, got com again, and then we saw the toppling of coal,

which in 2014 with western support. and this is what then again, unraveled the conflict us. this will seem to be another effort by nato to, to rob ukraine of its neutrality. and even the 2015, the agreement that was seen by russia to a large extent of cementing ukraine's neutrality about and unfortunately never went anywhere. and so i think that's definitely the decline on the child you're collapse from the child's in europe. will continue to make diplomacy more and more difficult and create more areas of conflicts mark, you know, following up on, on what glen was saying there. let me ask you about perceptions of neutrality around the world right now at a moment like this. does it seem to you that more people are viewing the concept of neutrality negatively? well, yes, i mean, i think there was in different cases now and miss ukraine war,

russia war, which is some way, a sibling war. right. if you think about it, between brothers and the media has of course, stoke the, this paper, the russia for everywhere tennis fair as being bad. what have you, which is very uncanny and regrettable. i do think neutrality has gotten how to go right. and which is very unfortunate, especially for country switzerland. and that's why, especially calling to see switzerland, you know, jump into this so, so, so, so precipitously. and i would say there's a broader crisis. you're frankly speaking and you don't, the trial is not something that you can point to united states. if you think about the founding fathers, they were saying we don't want to go abroad for to search for monsters to destroy. and then over time, america got involved and boiled more and more wars recently we know as well. and it became defect don't empire and speak. and someone like, you know, john merced primary chemistry on this. warned against that is a really saying we shouldn't go broad become an empire,

and we have the united states as well. and what for now is unfortunately also jumping on the bandwagon to a degree. but i would say both cases in the united states and it's what's another case, the decisions were made. i repeat talk down, it wasn't really a democratic process. there never was really vote on whether we should go into iraq, going to be going to other countries. now ukraine men dropped a lot of these decisions were taken top down, especially in switzerland. and i think there will be a popular sort of resentment at some point because there's a huge economic price going. we should maybe talk about that too, because all these countries are going to probably suffer more from the sanctions than russia. and that's a very important point to i think that breaking this neutrality is yes, it's endangering global piece because diplomacy is no longer on the able countries . i find it difficult to act as diplomat, but also economically, i think the consequences are very severe and not necessarily positive for anyone ukrainian or russian european american civilians. so i think that's important.

happy one at a time when dialogue and diplomacy oftentimes aren't achieving their aims. when it comes to trying to find political solutions to conflicts, different parts of the world are institutions like the u. in, in decline. i think that is absolutely no doubt about the fact that the united nation is on a minute a decline. we hardly hear of the united nations, but being able to do anything around the world that it's such a big the in any case, the one organization that is supposed to save got the security off the system, which is not the next to call. it has become so the funds i just want to find, but yet you don't have to become the counselor. so i think this argument that a lot of us have been making from the global pudding, india,

that the global war, international organizations need a fund of restructuring today's missions. council all global, the various other institutions do not represent the realities all because of the system piece was that i'd be at the, at the end of the 2nd world war to be there is the i'm they have taken aides, the whole absolutely. no. why do you say that the don't have any critical systems of practice in place? you don't have to media during crises ought to bring about to get with the app. so i think, you know what, not with time, what happens the end up is water in your grade, all audience. yeah. very seriously thinking that is required by the community on what kind of systems are required for keeping peace going for? i think it's something that has been demanded by the,

by the follow the global glenn. there are many countries in europe that may be rethinking their neutrality right now because of the war in ukraine. but what about other countries around the world are a lot of other countries around the world struggling with this as well right now? well, from my perspective, list away i see it. i think it's mainly problems because we spoke about india. again, it's, it's they, they're trying to adopt a new reality again, when you have countries like if you see the rise of china, they might be concerned. and therefore seeking closer partnerships with united states, japan, and other companies in the region. on the other hand, you also on the line kind of like in the us there and seen about nothing seem to join an lines the targets china see therefore see a very cautious language. that is, that they want to be in this formation to be probation and chinese for example. so effectively not going against the chinese so. so for this reason,

i don't think my child in asia, for example, is falling apart in the form of development of a nation, nato. so i think again, a lot of this goes back to the whole the whole, what's very unique about europe, which is that after the cold war, we have this moved 1st that we were going to have a security architecture which wasn't linked to the competing cold, more secure than military boxed and again, i think people, people are there was appreciate what exactly happened because it was in 1909. that the, the meeting was supposed been like an inclusive security institutions which, which would reduce the role of the military lines. this was so that the russians that committed themselves, for example, to withdrawing their interest from baltimore over at georgia. however, when they saw that the you would not be the inclusive impartial security

lines because of nato expansion. isn't there. so natal replacing them that they came to the conclusion, they couldn't pull out because either they have their troops there or they will join nato. so having troops in this countries became a tool for imposing on them. and this is, this has been kind of the experienced over the years in, in europe. all right, well, we are out of time, so we're going to have to leave the discussion there. thanks so much to all of our guests, mark for ha, happy mon jacob and glen decent. and thank you to for watching. you can see the program again any time by visiting our website, algebra dot com. and for further discussion, go to our facebook page. that's facebook dot com, forward slash ha inside story. you can also during the conversation on twitter, our handle is at a j inside story for me. mm hm. mm hm. jerome, the whole team here, bye for now. ah.

ah. a was an arabic. my name is carla. i was abducted by the cia in 2004, a german citizen was kidnapped and tortured by the cia. and he came up with handcuffs, led me into interpretation. the new documentary tells the story of how the geo politics of the post 911 world moving the life of an innocent deal mastery case on al jazeera, june on al jazeera as watches. invasion of the brain approaches the 100 day mark.

we bring you the latest from on the ground and the wars global impact. a new 3 part series describes the struggle for the return of african art funded by colonialism and still housed in european museums today. the g 7 m nato hold key summits with the water ukraine on the growing global food and the cost of living crises. this much to discuss as the influence of far right. politics grows. the big picture examines francis struggle to live up to the self proclaimed ideals of liberty, equality and fraternity. the men's world help qualify. i'm middle blazing opportunity for countries to secure their spot for katara 2022. june on al jazeera . ah, i'm fully back to go in dill. how would i look at the main stories on al jazeera us present? joe biden has delivered an impassioned address to the nation on.