the livelihoods of coastal communities around the world in many developing and least developed countries. communities living in coastal areas remain quite profoundly dependent on unhealthy fish, stuck at the fish population. so being depleted by the fishing and destructive fishing practices, also by the degradation of coastal habitat like like men growth and those impact hounded by climate change with thing, the decline and progressive collapse systems like car race, the performance provide food for so many people. so the, the, the declining health of the ocean has, has quite profound impacts the humanity. but there is type, we do know how to turn around, but it requires a commitment and an action for all the society that's, that's one of the opportunities presented to us here. this week at the national conference to redouble our efforts to trend like commitment interaction. ah,

this is where these are the top stories, the head of nato's called russia. the most significant and direct threat to security as allies prepare for summit in madrid. deadlines wants to boost its rapid reaction. forces from 40000 troops 230-0000. at least 16 people have been killed in a russian missile strike on a shopping mall in ukraine. it happened in the central city of common shock. dozens of others were injured. shall stratford as more from the capital keep emergency services are saying that they are now still sifting through the burnt rubble, expecting potentially to find the charred remains of more people who were killed. we've also had some interesting information from the national security and defense council of ukraine. they saying that according to preliminary data, they believed that these attacks involved what they say were x 22 air base. cruise missiles are fired from an aircraft. they said that one hit the shopping mall.

another one hit the city's stadium. a tank of toxic gas has fallen from a crane at the jordanian port of october, killing at least 12 people at least $260.00 people were reported injured. people living nearby have been told to stay at home and keep their windows closed. a passenger train has derailed in the us state of missouri and killing at least 3 people an injury. dozens more. the amtrak service was traveling from los angeles to chicago when i collided with a dump truck at a rail crossing 7 cars and 2 locomotives derailed. police in india have arrested the co founder of top the fact checking website. alt news. um, its a bare has been a vocal critic of the government and has called out hate speech by hindu right wing groups on the internet. police accuse him of provoking religious outrage. the indigenous movement that led more than 2 weeks of protest in ecuador as meeting the

government to discuss possible solutions. earlier, the indigenous leaders rejected a promise by president give yell more lasso to cut the price of petrol and diesel by $0.10 a gallon. they said it wasn't enough to meet their demands, but they said it showed progress was possible. those are the headlines. the news continues yet on al jazeera, after inside story, she in havana for life. ah, what could the g 70 do to stop the war in ukraine leaders of the. busy world's biggest economies, said the baron, posing more sanctions on moscow. but is that enough? and can the group remain united against vladimir putin? this is inside story.

ah, ah. hello, welcome to the program. i'm adrian finnegan for months of war in ukraine have exposed deep divisions in the global ot up, but the fighting is also highlighting and testing some of the oldest and strongest alliances. the g 7, a group of the world, 7 largest economies is meeting this week in germany. sanctions by some of its members and counter sanctions from russia have disrupted everything they've touched from oil prices to supply chains to the price of bread. on the other side of the world, under germany's presidency, the g 7 is pushing for solutions to reduce the impact of a war on the global economy. which he certainly does issued a statement to remove any doubt about that commitment to keep saying that they will continue to provide financial humanitarian,

military and diplomatic support and stand with ukraine for as long as it takes. they also announced targeting sanctions on those responsible for war crimes or exercising illegitimate authority in ukraine. the statement added that russia bez enormous responsibility for rising threats to global food security. as a result of the conflict. china is also on the g 7 summit agenda, $600000000000.00 have been pledged to count a bay james belt on road initiative, and beijing has been quick to respond to long shadow playing each. i know what items are the initiatives that be more global infrastructure. we believe that there is not any initiative aimed at replacing each other. what we oppose is to advance geopolitical calculations and smear the belt enjoyed initiative in the name of promoting global infrastructure development. ah. so let's bring it, i guess, for today's discussion from berlin,

we're joined by all rick brooklyn, who's professor of political science at stanford university in berlin. from washington, d. c. doug bando senior fellow at the cato institute, i'm from oslo. glenn, decent professor of international relations at the university of se norway, gentlemen, welcome to the program. i'm a rec that start with you. so g 7 lead us. we'll stand with ukraine for as long as it takes, as long as what takes what is it? the g 7 leaders want on how long is long? well, all these questions have not been answered yet. what we saw was a strong signal, and that's the symbolism of some itself, that kind that sometimes feel a bit like 20th century as if we are not having phone calls or so meetings. so it's more like we send a signal, but we don't go into detail because everyone is affected differently across the

sanctions. and everyone also has a different agenda or is more or less careful with all the balances that need to be considered. doug, what do you make of it? how long is long and, and what is it? the g 7 leaders actually want here? i think they even know clearly perspectives differ in the different capitals. countries are affected differently. they have different past relations with russia . they have a different, i think, willingness to tolerate cost as a, in terms of where we're going. everyone would like to see russia to lose, but that doesn't necessarily mean a victory for ukraine. and in many ways, i think that is the biggest issue is the emphasis going to be on trying to reach some kind of a ceasefire in peace, or is the emphasis to help by ukraine? have some kind of a military victory on that. we don't know and those outcomes are very different. they have a very different implication for the cost and the length of time granted victory

for ukraine humiliation fought for russia. what is it? the chief 7 leaders are often oh, that's kind of unclear because going to talk about victory. ukraine. what does this mean? because at times ukraine has expressed interest in, in re conquering all of us even taking by crimea. so this would entail my actual war with russia. and again, part of the russian motivation behind this is obviously and just stop the expansionism and it is increasing amounts of american weapon system calls this border. so it's russia would pull out, obviously this would, these weapons would only keep boring in sound, so i'm not sure how that's how the mixture would be even possible. i think we'll find all the way to the end. so and so i,

i just don't see him see clearly how victory hasn't been conceptualized. also it's unclear and how even a stalemate is going to result in any kind of a diplomatic solution. because again, the, the fair from moscow that would be obviously that the west will take advantage of its temporary peace agreement to merely rearm credit. i keep pushing nato. so i, it's there, it's very, it's sort of big statements without any clear operationalization of a clear object. what this would actually mean. all right for, oh, rick, they put on this united front as you say, they made this strong statement of support for ukraine. but what is actually going on behind closed doors to think how long can that unity last given the economic consequences of the war? well, that's what i meant by the different balances that need to be considered. and in my

humble understanding of what has been the motivation of the objectives, because clearly don't understand how put in ticks. that was a calculation that the west is post heroic, not willing to fight a war and not taking a risk. we don't believe in anything we are your list we are sexual and so as wimps as we. ready are it would be easy to go in and to achieve objectives that made no sense in terminology like a diagnostic cation, whatever. what we have now is united way, much stronger natal, and even extended nato, a stronger investment in records intervention forces. so basically the opposite of what could in try to reach you. but the also african situation in which all the different leaders pay different domestic class. some struggle more with inflation, some more dependent on for zone or we and others. when we look

at the internal discussion about what is prior to paid or express and solidarity, what kind of upper school, if we look, for example, had my call, his position was way stronger before the parliamentary elections a few days ago. and this is all something that needs to be taken into consideration . doug, who's leading the g 7 right now. okay. johnson shells his hosting this meeting but, but who's in the driving seat? as far as policy is concerned, is the us at the moment taking a back seat and following the rest, or is it actually leading? do you think, based in terms of the war in ukraine? well, in terms of the war, i think the us, broadly speaking, has driven the process. the u. s. has contributed substantially more in terms of money and weapons. it, you know, has the advantage of having the real military, you know, the dominates nato. frankly,

the country that most european countries have cheerfully cheap written on, you know, for decades. so there's an element of which the u. s. has a natural leadership role there, but it's not alone. the other countries matter and it matters a lot to have other european countries indicate they are prepared to do more. and we see even the country like turkey can throw a spanner in the works over the issue of bringing in finland and sweden for its own purposes. so there's leadership, but there's not domination. i think that what we see going forward is indicated, micron has his own domestic issues. certainly germany, meaning complicated political situation. a 3 party government bearing significant energy costs. even in the u. s. the politics is not going to be easy outside of washington, you know, support. busy for a deep commitment to ukraine does not necessarily that strong. i talked to my non political friends and they are asking why $40000000000.00 when that's

a lot more than europe is done. why? $40000000000.00 and we have a trillion dollar deficit. and we see in the republican party increasing willingness on the hard right to ask questions about this. so this is going to be a very difficult process going forward. nothing is guaranteed grant. granted that the european union it well represented at this, this summit doesn't the g 7 itself doesn't represent all european nations? how does that the rest of europe minus the u. k. france and italy view the war in ukraine? well, i guess you're a business in many ways, western european countries are more cautious while the countries, poland, in the baltic states, they're more hawkish, more aligned with united states and the u. k. on this matter. so i would say that the, initially, i think we've had a lot of unity because it's a nation by russia took everyone by surprise and shock,

which was why you have this common interest in balancing this common um, research. but i do believe that the, a lot of this unity was based on the premise that made it would have victory over russia or ukraine, supported by nato. but i think what you will see is not just a split between the us and european, but within europe as well. they will see more of the emissions displaying themselves. now that the conflict is not going our way because again, russia winning now on the battlefield. and the sanctions i terribly on the or so becomes therefore reasonable and reasonable. i'm more of the vision is within the g 7 so well for example, mid argument that the u. s. and the u. k. would probably like to see this war going for a while, because it has many good objectives for in the us. so the impulses block, discipline within the west, which the us has not been previous able to achieve the us been able to get there the couple from russian energy and economy,

which in doing the past. we also see that the us can extend european divorce to china, so you credible the bulwark against russia, where the foreseeable future and the, you have this oppertunity of making you create enough on the stands for the russians to lead, drives, economy, and his military. so many opportunities for the us, but that's what i mean. there's a split because for the your, for the or p and much higher costs and incentive effort to push them to this more because they're simply because they're paying higher price. they don't want to knock on their weapon stores have been depleted from all this transfers to ukraine . the sanctions hard hurting their much more, not just this temporary energy crisis and installation, but also see that your be in industries will no longer be competitive on international markets. with all of this cheap, fresh energy and metals are now export to asia. so the production costs will therefore increase dramatically in europe. and overall the appeals become more and more dependent on the us as a result. so all the goals of strategic autonomy will not collapse. so i think you

will see more push now from, for example, the germans, italians and the french to, to have some more diplomacy for, to sit down with the russians. and so this on the splitting now and with this 3 leaders from the, from 8 till the germany and the problems going to keep asking to start negotiations with russia. meanwhile, you know, there are you have the johnson coming from your case saying this is not the right time for peace and americans sending have your weapons. so i think the of the conflict continues to go the wrong way for us. i think this division is within the west. it's kind of become more and more obvious. oh rick, how long before the european electorate begins to demand the government's ease, the sanctions and pull back on this war? a people in europe prepared to endure a winter of power council rationed energy supplies. do you think when it comes to that? well, if things continue like this, there is no other way than to restrict,

not only industry, but also heating or have other means that clearly show that we are part of this war and not as a party of war. but we are massively affected far more than the united states, but it's very difficult to predict because we don't have is one european electorate . we have very different conditions in each and every member state. and we also have different communication techniques by them more or less popular leaders that also play a role until they, it's something like a change of power within european union member states. and this point, of course, german politicians would love to see a diplomatic solution for this. but public opinion is still very strongly in support for the actions of solidarity towards ukraine and will show us for a minute. my call at this point in time don't really have much to doug. i just want

to give you an opportunity to respond what graham to what glen was saying about the us, perhaps liking to keep this war going for the moment. and then what to ask you, what the g twin teach you think the a solid in its support for ukraine and condemnation of russia as the g 7 is a broader you go, the less support you find for the u. s. european position of the top 10 population countries in the world. only one is taking a position america. you know, very notably not only china, but india. i've resisted indian purchases of russian oil have skyrocketed very dramatically. but you go beyond that, you look at brazil, you look at south africa, or you look at indonesia. i mean, these are countries that have not jumped on the sanctions bandwagon. there's a lot of reasons for that. i mean, the global south is much more cynical about european and american pretensions and

morality. i mean, the u. s. believes in a rural based order, except when it doesn't that invades countries and occupies them even if it's against the international law and it kills. busy lot of people, you know, the president biden is talking about human rights in about to make a trip to saudi arabia to beg, the saudis have killed hundreds of thousands of people in yemen to provide more oil . so the u. s. can sanction russia mean that the problem is, those kinds of inconsistencies really play out in other countries whose view is much more cynical. they don't like the aggression. i mean, so, you know, russia clearly in the wrong, but they're also much more skeptical the following leadership that they, frankly are quite so happy about the potential of indonesia inviting russia, the, the g 20 meeting, you know, adds a quite a complication exactly how that would play out if that happens, i think would be difficult for everyone involved. glenn, while the g 7 understandably sees the war in ukraine is critical to global security

. what about the rest of the world? how supportive of the tea? 7th position up. asian african, latin american countries. to, to what extent to many countries while sympathetic towards ukraine simply have to put their own citizens 1st. well that's kind of shows with the numbers was joined in on the sanctions and well i it's pretty much restrictive tomato, the rest of the world hasn't really joined in on any of the sanctions. but i would agree with doug, it doesn't mean that they support the russian invasion of ukraine by no means. i think most companies would condemn this. however, while this seems to be some consensus around condemning it, there's not much interest in punishing us currently because there's not enough admin to see the moral authority of the west. and also they see more dubious interest behind this in terms of knocking out the key area as opposed to standing

up for the market. but it's also more recognition around the world that even though this is word, process full for dating, that the nato obviously provoked to a great extent. i mean, this is, you hear this around the world, you know, not just somebody in 95 nato as well with the turkey now saying the same thing even heard the same from the pope. so you, so this is to be a large come senses. the brush made or promote this, but then the process shouldn't necessarily have made it for the reasons. but you also of course, have this economic interest behind it. so it is for the, for example, to dictate to the indians that they shouldn't buy any russian oil or gas. it seems very provocative, especially as the west by russian oil and gas. but overall, i think they will look after their own interest and also see this huge opportunity for ation. because european comments have been very competitive because we've had

access to all this cheap russian energy metals in russia. they're diverting their entire economy towards the east and preparing themselves for permanent divorce with europe. the asian countries will become much more competitive as russia offering even discounts to asia, where the oil and gas. so i think they will look after their own interest and not get involved in what is effectively european conflict. 30 year old trucks war between nato and russia, which has now spill them and began to destroy ukraine. oregon has the g. 7 signalled clearly enough that it understands the gravity of the global commodity price crisis and, and other economic shocks linked to the war, and that they will take realistic steps to address them. well, the question is, what would realistic steps b and what has been said before that repeating the russian myth of nato is threatening. russia doesn't make it any more. credible nato has no

appetite to be involved in a military conflict with the 2nd largest nuclear arsenal. in the world that makes no sense. what frightened russia was the economic prosperity west of russia. if we compare ukraine and poland, and poland became poor times, which are by joining the european union. and if the anti ukraine would do the same thing that would undermine the credibility of an authoritarian regime in moscow. so if the westwood give in and say, well actually we didn't expect it to be so expensive. and it also has extra analogies on the rest of the world with top the sanctions. one would be the situation on the ground. it could possibly find something like a frozen conflict, but then both sides would try as much as they can to strike back and to win the upper hand. that is not the end of the conflict. there is no military solution in

this conflict, and it needs more than giving in of the one or the other site. this would only my understanding the solution if other heavy weights like china would step in and to their contribution to stop it. doug, the g sub statement said that the, the group of foster coordinated initiatives that promote global food security. to what extent should that along with a rising price of fuel and commodities, be the number one priority at least in terms of maintaining support for the war. and the rest of the world, all the obvious, humanitarian reasons to do accept the war aside. you know, the lack of exports, particularly from ukraine in terms of grain or opposing, an extraordinary hardship on poor countries that are least able to deal with it. the problem is again,

it's not clear exactly what the west can do. there have been proposals to try to forcibly open your ports of ukraine in the black sea that would require number one . busy cooperation from turkey, which is not at all and my my likely but 2nd, that would be itself a potential cost as well. i. i think what we have to recognize are the danger of this is, is the longer it goes on the more dangerous. i think it gets, which is, you know, for russia, this is a vital interest for russia. this is an extra central interest. we don't have to think it should be, but it is, in my opinion, it's not for the west. so i think that russia and bruton are quite willing to risk and spend a lot more and along the way ukraine is the primary victim. in the world bank figures, the economy will be cut roughly and half millions of people have fled. the country cities are being reduced to ruin. so the longer we go, the more dangerous it could spread, the, the more the russian in the danger of

a question of a new use of nuclear weapons is one. most people assume won't happen. nevertheless, to the extent they are lost, i think it becomes more dangerous. so the, the so much at stake and certainly the issue of food is huge. but i don't know how we solve that absent ending the war. that is, unless, unless one is willing to forcibly try to open the back seat and get the grain out, the question is otherwise, are we at the west prepared to share its resources to accept hire food prices at a time of raging inflation? i don't think the by the administration would for all of its humanitarian rhetoric . the democrats face a potential disaster. remember, by elections i to kind of raise prices further, just appear to be giving away american product. i think europe faces the same difficulty with energy prices rising at home. what can it do in terms of trying to ease the food shortages abroad?

glen, i've got less than a minute here, just a quick on so please bearing in mind what, what doug was saying that about russia being pushed into a corner on the sanctions against russia working are they having the desired effect? well, they're having some effect it. so well, so far then, of course, then the west main goal was to destroy the russian economy, financial system and the rubel. or so far, we see that the economy is stabilized at financial systems named lesson. the rubel is much stronger than it was before the war. however, a lot of this punishment or the pain of sanctions will probably come later on. so i think the worst of the sanctions is you have to come for russia. but, but that being said, the point of sanctions is to change to political behavior and i don't see russia changing as policies because are russia, this is deemed to be an existential threat. nato expansion towards the water. it's set for more than 20 years, is next suspension. threat, so they're not gonna give up because some, some economic problems. so they will probably continue to fight this to the end and only exacerbating the conflict. so i, i, i depends,

i would define the effectiveness of success, or i, gentlemen, we're out of time many thanks indeed for being with us today. or rick brooklyn, doug bondo and glen deason. and thank you for watching. don't forget, you can see the program again at any time by going to the website of al jazeera dot com for further discussion, join us at our facebook page. you'll find that at facebook dot com forward slash ha inside story. as you can join the conversation on twitter handle at ha, inside story from me, a free and again, the team here and how, thanks for watching. i'll see you again. bye for now. ah. and

whole goal is for him to mark 25 years since foot. he handed it back to china. life has changed dramatic critics. a freedoms have been stripped away and china is tightening. it's great to water know for the one country to systems once promised by gauging the hong kong handle special cover on our 0, lou criminal drug dealing 50 to place is beyond the reach of lou. and there are many people in afghan government way involved in the drug trade. gorilla was in columbia and mexico where the cartels have been responsible for a merciless spiral of violence. the final episode of drug trafficking politics of territories on al jazeera meteorites, small natural rocks from outer space that survived the journey down to wife and

have high market value for rock and minimum collectors. al jazeera worlds joins the moroccan, know mice in their desert search for these gifts from the sky, head up here. now i can tell that it's a meter i had it is it is i me to write morocco's meteorite hunters on all. josie ah, which is 0, which is a you oh, a general matheson and doha, the told stories on audio 0, the head of nato is labeled russia.