media scrutiny of political decision making. so should people be worried about the media having to pay for access to their elected politicians at a cost subject, right? different subject altogether. what do you say? i'm not going to the conservative party to run, but i'm absolutely clear the democratic principle here is, are the politicians available to an accountable to the public? and the answer is yes, but johnson is on the way out of control over how his party goes about fundraising . remains his focus. people say media ticketing needs to cover things like security checks and accreditation. critic say it's a tax on democracy. andrew simmons al jazeera fermi side, who say they don't know how to control a virus that's killed 3 young elephants that is in switzerland. so cape is say, the car died from a form of herpes infection, results in internal bleeding and organ family em, which causes death within day. the thing is with this virus is not allowed. we can

do. there is a method with giving antiviral medicine, but this has not been shown that it's highly effective. it's around 30 percent of the elephant that survive. and therefore it's like this kind of helplessness that we feel because we can't really treat it. there is not like signs is not far enough that we, for example, have a vaccine. ah, now what changes are these? the headlines? ukraine says it's ready to dispatch the 1st shipments of grain from its black se ports. president vladimir lensky says he's waiting for the go ahead from the u. n. and turkey. john hendrick is in the port city of south until this agreement was brokered by turkey. these waters were simply too unsafe for anybody to transport going. so none of that had happened. you've had 20 to 25000000 tons of

grain just sitting in this port. and now it appears beginning today that ukraine will once again feed the world. and that's important because there's a looming food crisis in africa and elsewhere where people are desperately waiting for these shipments to come. so we'll have apparently a 1st shipment today, and then there will be other shipments u. s. secretary of state antony, blinkin and russia's foreign minister sick. i love have spoken on the phone for the 1st time since russia invited ukraine in february. lincoln says he warned leverage against any annexation plan. he also urged leverage to accept a u. s. deal to release to american citizens detained in russia. russian state media reports lever of top lincoln, the 2 sides must return to quiet diplomacy for prisoner exchanges. a quote in the u . s. has decided civil lawsuits brought against libyan wall. busy khalifa, hafta can be heard in federal courts. have tom who's a us citizen is accused of war crimes and extra judicial killings. during libby as

civil war. the world bank says he'd warrant give show lanka, financial assistance until it puts economic reforms in place. the country has been plunged into a date financial crisis since 2019 and man mcmillan trays accused of using fighter planes to fire and guided munitions in civilian areas. independent investigators say the june to has increased air attack since last east coast. all right, those are the headlines. i'm emily angland states you now for inside story. ah, the threat of nuclear war is greater than ever. that's the warning. in britain's

top security advise that he blamed the breakdown of communication between the west, russia and china, to what's needed to restore global security. this isn't had sort ah hello, welcome to the program on the wrong car. the west could accidentally stumble into a nuclear war with russia or china. that's the warning from britain's national security adviser. stephen lock great, who says communication channels between the west and its rivals of collapse. rushes invasion of ukraine, he says, is the clearest example of this breakdown. diplomacy fell to prevent the war moscow and keep haven't held face to face, talked since march, lovegrove says the conflict is just the beginning of a broader contest for a successor to the post cold war international order. he's warning of new security

risks as countries develop more advanced weapons and compete in both outer space and cyberspace, the solutions, but a dialogue between the west, russia and china. during the cold war, we benefited from a series of negotiations and dialogues that improved our understanding of soviet doctrine and capabilities and vice versa. this gave both of us a higher level of confidence that we would not miss calculate our way into nuclear war. today we do not have the same foundations with others who may threaten us in the future, and particularly with china. here the u. k strongly supports president a biden's proposed talks, as with china as an important step. trust and transparency built through dialogue. should also mean that we can be more active in calling out noncompliance and misbehavior when we see it. ah, let's begin, i guess in london as sir hale asher, a nuclear non proliferation and discernment analyst in santander,

spain. harry's party, a c o of the consults, he rasmussen global and in to lose france. alexander he took a lecture in modern european history at queen's university belfast. a warm welcome to each of you want to begin in london where the ursa hilcher. there is a very famous film doctor strange law, which is almost a parody, but also a warning about the, about the way 2 countries can get into an accidental nuclear war. it was designed as a parody, but a lot of what was in that film. a lot of the central tenant of foreign policy is that there are back channels on those back channels will always saver. but now we have stephen lovegrove national security advisor to the u. k saying those by channels don't exist. is he right? well, you know, it's no secret to you or your audience and run that. we're in a major, russia west crisis, and that includes the ongoing conflict in ukraine, but it's actually much wider than that. and i think we all have to ask ourselves, what kind of russia west crisis do we want?

do we want a deep cold war, or do we want, how it was during the latter part of that period where we actually communicated with the adversary? and we worked together to try to muddle through despite our different worldviews at the moment. it is true, the lack of dialogue between the us and russia, and nato and russia is putting us in a very precarious position because it's not just the back channel forms of communication that are necessary. we also need a very, very resilient and smart front end channel communication. so for example, between presidents biden and put in and if we are to stumble into some sort of a nuclear conflict, i'm currently not competent, for example, that the hotline that exists between washington and moscow would be able to technically stand up to the challenges that would happen in a degraded environment in the middle of a nuclear war, for example. so steven love groves is comments c, s i s, and you see yesterday were very important and it's a very,

very important reminder that we need to make sure that we have the ability to communicate clearly and smartly to the adversary because that's how we got out of the cold war, and that's how we'll also get out of this current, russia less crisis. let me bring in, febreeze puts a brief note just about russia. china is also a very big concern for not just even lovegrove, but a communications with china generally. but we're in a position now where perhaps we don't need that kind of communication, that big red telephone. there's drones, the satellites nowadays, we've got different types of tech. you have monitoring, going on. you have other channels. those traditional methods of thinking about dated not really, but i see what is not up to date east the way we speak, including about nuclear deterrence. so i think i slightly disagree with the previous speaker. it's not the lack of dialogue because it actually is not for the like of having tried to engage, especially with letting me put in. i mean,

president mac or nato itself, the u. s. and these tradition of all try to reach out to the russian president is the lack of interest on the side to a true for me and meaning for me engage with the west and try to minimize the risks of, of hopefully them in cedar. and every fall, and i'll tell you what we have to focus on on our side is really what channel language we want to speak and, and how nuclear fox offer the fact that let me pretty use that the nuclear agitated nuclear flag. they early on ease warf aggression against ukraine, that did not really get a response for the western nuclear powers. was actually a confirmation that the west has lost the beat of the nuclear difference grammar. and really 1st to reload a grammar before engaging and meaningful dido. i let me bring in alexander, he told her it makes a fabrics makes a very interesting point about learning grammar and,

and language and history. the 62 cuban missile crisis. everybody knows that the, the russians put missiles into cuba, which freaked out america was night miles away from dear spain, on what everybody forgets is actually the only reason those missiles were in cuba is because the americans put missiles and turkey, which was in russia's backyard effectively there's always been a disconnect between when it comes to the language and the framing of all of this when it comes to russia, when it comes to china, that they're always the bad guys. is that been unhelpful? well, i think our food beyond a good or bad guys that's not relevant anymore. horse roches, metaphors, chinese, bad. so far as the west is concerned, you know, there's nothing to discuss at so fast. you know, those locations are concert. if you just go back to the venue show up to 62, nissan rises, you know, that's when the red lines were put when the direct phone that was put between washington multiple to prevent anything like this happening again. and that's

really, it was created the called what a security architecture of mutual deterrents and so forth. was this very dangerous drive which act lead it later, led to agreements in the early seventy's about limitations on arms and so forth. so i'm afraid we would, we, having now i ease this. another crisis are very similar to that, that one where the red line so blurred. those are, there is some communication behind the lines. the, a russian, military speaking to route lies with american military and so forth. but at the same time will read lots of it. look, we having a very radio bill got all off of need addresses to see grain, the range of misses and so forth, which it previously if even for my 3 months ago, that would be a thinkable. so an ross's haven't really responded this, so we're gonna washington was this alarm where we were to know when the russians

were actually say that enough is enough of, than mike, enough escalated for their own, their own. so that's, that's what, what is the injured the moment is not so much like a communications, but this blurred lines which are very remiss, the nuisance of the not to $62.00 or when the last at the nuclear close at the so i think i agree with the, with the 1st big that, you know, there are actually very, very interested lilian. ok, so that's russia, that's china. that's a, you know, and that's the u. s. and that's the west. and there is a big red telephone and we just need to probably use it a bit more than we are using it. but there is a big red telephone to north korea to pakistan, to india, to israel. and those guys have nuclear weapons and neither of them of signed the non liver ration tree sale. you know what, what is the, what is the danger of those states? they're small estates with nuclear weapons? sure. let me make 2 quick point just to respond to my follow panelists. the 1st is, i totally agree with the brief. i think the main comment that i was trying to make

is that we need resilient crisis communication channels. so that if this conflict in ukraine spirals into a wider, for example, nato russia conflict that we have the ability for our leaders, whether on the nuclear brink or already past the nuclear brain, to avert complete calamity. and my 2nd point is that a part of deterrence is, of course, being able to communicate effectively to your adversary. and if you don't have any communication channels open and you're simply relying on rhetorical posturing in public and in the media, that's a really dangerous place to be in because it offers very little private off rams to be able to de escalate the situation. and when it comes to your comment just now about their already being a read telephone and, but we don't have them with the other states. this is why i'm nervous. it's because that bilateral channel, between washington and moscow, there isn't one between washington and beijing as the leader level in the same that's created in the same way. and there also are very limited military to

military channels between these 3 great powers. moreover, there is no way for any of the leaders of any of these countries, these 3 countries and also the wider 9 countries in the world with nuclear weapons to be able to communicate multilaterally. so there's no way right now for say, president bite in president putin, president she to get all on the phone at once, especially in a degraded environment in the middle of say, a nuclear conflict. and we need something like that in terms of the smaller nuclear power there rising emerging nuclear powers. of course, it's very dangerous and they all affect the international security environment in different ways. right now in north korea is expanding its nuclear arsenal. iran is becoming closer and closer to a threshold state because the lack of agreement between the in iran on restoring the 2015 nuclear deal. these are all very worrying developments. and in addition to

the ongoing war in ukraine, they're going to factor in very heavily on over the course of the next month as the international community. a convenes in new york to discuss that 52 year old nuclear nonproliferation treaty the and p t, which is really that cornerstone international treaty that governs the world in terms of setting standards and also creating the pathways to global disarmament and keeping a cap amplifier ation. at the same time, but for british the n p t, the nuclear non proliferation treaty um, has failed in many ways because india has nuclear weapons pakistan has them. israel has them, north korea has them. but there's no real communication between india and pakistan right now. and that is probably the closest flash point that we have for bruce. do you think that needs to be a stronger and p t or at least or, or doesn't need to be more up better police rather on those countries need to sign up. we need to push them to sign up. frankly,

i think the success of the n p t that the failure has been contained to a handful of countries and nf. this is the key here to this discussion today is a lot of non nuclear countries are watching though to war and ukraine and to see how and whether the west will be sufficiently support to ukraine to the extent where the ukrainians can prevail. somehow in the battlefield and in the negotiations. and if we were to fail to do so, i figured lot of countries who currently are not a nuclear weapon, a countries would consider what is considered the ultimate guarantee and which is nuclear weapons. so i think what we do here and in ukraine in fundamentally what is a conventional conflict, could have some very important repercussions, but about how the p t is holding or not. so that's my answer. it kind of connect

the n p t at to the geopolitical reality of today until is alexander as he's off. would you agree with that? well, i think and of the, of the point about that, i think everybody knows that the ultimate guarantee is nuclear weapons. if you look at the bill will happen to kathy will hear and if agree to give up is up and simultaneous later you ended up in addition. so what, you know, the south korea, north korea, north where a well, and russia is also is so bold to your grade because it knows that natal certainly united states are not prepared to risk nuclear. we'll, we'll ukraine. so we are leaving and age when nuclear weapons are essentially the ultimate guarantee, which gives you superpower status. and the question of how to prevent it from spreading. busy further isn't, is an important one, but you know,

much directory that's a big state such as seems you focused on israel opposed to the system to be iran as well. if they can, we will wire it because because basically is how it works and you care weapons as senior friend gives you extra steam advantage. those of putting pressure on this i've got the key point about the regional wireless. if we're going to be there early point is that the nuclear weapons logic and the regional threat where. ready ross and threat is a global threat. cancel via $55.00 nuclear power, nuclear power actually bridges to struck anywhere else in the world. which not said the case with alice, but was working. but yeah, that's valid. we are already living in the world well to go into security and there's no begging for it. the ultimate guarantee of security then is nuclear

weapons rules seem to be agreed on that it seems to be a doctrine. certainly, you mentioned iran that i want to talk about iran. iran is got very close to being a threshold state as has been described. it hasn't said it has a nuclear weapons program has admitted having a nuclear program. ah, the j c p, away the iran nuclear deal effectively froze all those tensions and brought iran back into the world. but then that treaty was ripped up by prison. donald trump and the u. s. is finding it incredibly difficult to renegotiate that treaty. so hale ah, this is a failure again of the west of america, because certainly, no one trusts the america will stick to it. still, that's the iranian way of thinking right now. why should we trust the u. s. if they just going to rip up a deal, so why not get nuclear weapons?

while there is a growing chorus of voices in terror on that feel that the only way for them to have the right leverage to be able to negotiate a sustain deal that they can trust with washington and with other world powers is to increase their status from having a very rich nuclear program to one of that of a nuclear threshold state, or perhaps even getting a nuclear weapon. unfortunately, i would be extremely risky for the entire global security architecture because it would probably incite some sort of a military conflict in the region, particularly with israel. so we really do need to get washington and toronto agree to the roadmap that was already largely decided in march of this year. but that both sides are dragging their feet on. washington has to make up for the fact that it was indeed the u. s. abrogation of the deal under president trump that caused this trust deficit in the 1st place. iran continued to comply with the deal for an

entire year before gradually reducing its implementation. of course, we also now had president in bite in come into office and dragging his feet for a number of months. and then now as we're getting closer and closer to the us mid term elections, it seems that there isn't a political will power in the white house to get the gc p restoration over the finish line. and i really call a president biden, who in october, before he came into the white house ro, a very compelling cnn off. at that said, there's a smarter way to be tough on iran, which really made clear argument for why it's so important to get the g p a back in place. so that we are in a position to be able to think more about the other issues that we have within iran, with iran, for example, it's expanding ballistic missile, running out of time, know what to bring, you know, other guesses as well. busy brief, you've heard what sale has been talking about that we do need to bring iran back to negotiating table. american does seem to be dragging its feet. but what is the

incentive for the west to try and force the americans back to negotiate table? is there any, is there any pressure anybody can put on the when i see the incentive is also upon the americans to avoid as the previous speaker said regional coffee and possibly original stroke, nuclear conflict. and you have to read the recent us israel john declaration, which is actually very clearly or where the u. s. is given to the sake of israel, clear guarantees that it will not allow a nuclei. iran, i thought happening. and i think that's a feed appear signal to day that the u. s. is coming to not to have a nuclear weapon or state or in the region about form of his he's rather this is not mentioned to join the corrosion. so i think this clarity here, or whether your message has been dry. he is feet that we not command,

but if he clearly it has its interest in finding a diplomatic solution. and if in the you is, are so i trying to do so for alexander, sorry, or to loose the, you are these traditional negotiating bodies, nato example, these, these things, these institutions were formulated, post cold war to try and freeze detentions that, to some extent. they have worked but will okay, a different landscape. now when there isn't actually a cold war any more a week moving towards the cold war again, she think well, i think you've come step in the same river twice. so without moving towards will be something very different and of course the cold war was defined in pieces, wanted to follow us. and there was also very intense ideological stand up between them and capitalism against communism and so forth. so i think that's likely to be repeated 1st of all, that will be much more central,

so follows in the walls of china, russia, europe, and the american protection will be de ron of course, and other others. so it's going to be going to be just 2 blocks will be more more dispersed structures in politics and logically again, you know, there's something different in terms of nationalism and or great follow. rather, i would say kind of going back to brief 1st war scenario when you have several paul was going to trying to reach other. but the nuclear weapons, of course is the, is the key. and i would say that, you know, if the americans come to iran now and they're really desperate need more oil on the market and the iran is the only and this place where over the next oil when come, when there are no, it was bands. you can do it now, i don't see how we're going to do it again. you run it will eventually those

patients with it will be very, very great. both these doses of the regular so it's all very, very dangerous stuff. and. busy to make a declaration with israel that they were not allowed, but told him that they're going to go to war with israel with it with the wrong. it's really plausible in terms of americans, by experience in iraq and so forth. iran, as much, sorry we, we all running out. we are running out home to do when it comes. everybody else. there is another way of dealing with this and the americans have actually done this to great effect in pakistan by supporting pakistan, by giving it money by supporting its military. it's great, a whole bunch of other problems about somebody's kept the nuclear weapons in their silos or in spain. fabrice, do you think that's a, a good strategy? i'm so given vacuous, and strike recording the permission of some nuclear technology to other countries

including north korea. so i would, i think pakistan was more a policy affair complete where the u. s. and no other choice, but just to, to basically embrace a pakistan nuclear status and try to contain the issue and make sure that the rifle to cause way in place to avoid a miscalculation and regional conflict. again, visit the india. so i don't think that there's a clear model here to follow. i think we have to, to, to, to think it in itself. but, but i do think that iran has as much interest as the wears to, to find a diplomatic solution in like the british speaker say they go so you see an energy or supply dimension to it. and, and, but the meet terms, obviously not going to help with the republicans fiercely against what is her, the hope a bite on the mistress is trying to go to the primitive from iran just very quickly . so hail in london were stumbling in the dark of robbery says the actually we need

a new strategy, but we don't know what that strategy is. is there anything that you think a leads us out this darkness? is there a new strategy? absolutely. dialogue on risks reduction and making sure that we deal with the fact that we have nuclear weapons. if you want to have nuclear weapons or you have, then you have to live with the responsibility and the consequences of them and explain to others how you will deal with the related challenges, right? so it's extremely important that all of the leaders of these key countries on come together and are able to make sure that they're correct. scaffolding is in place so that we mitigate crises and we mitigate conflict and war. so i think that the most important thing to do is to really have a deep reflection on how deterrents in arms control not only have always complimented one another, but that they all way have had to compliment one another to get us through really difficult periods. like the cold war,

we don't want to get into another deep cold war with russia. we want to try to mitigate the risks and learn from the past mistakes that we've made so that we can insure the safety and survivability of the entire world. and you know, that's what it is at stake is really global peace and security because nuclear weapons have the ability to annihilate the entire existence of this planet. i want to thank all our guests, so he'll show up every spots. yay and alexander, he's helping, i want to thank you as well for watching. you can see the program again any time by visiting our website out there a dot com and for further discussion, go to a facebook page. that's facebook dot com, forward slash ha inside story. and you could also join the conversation on twitter . we are at 8 and so sorry for me wrong on the whole team here. i can know. ah ah.

the latest news as it breaks the country, when was a monday on a controversial constitutional represent them, which is why the expected to both present cause slaves, alternative detail coverage. the cost of fertilizer has more than doubled the season. that's largely due to the war in ukraine, from around the world with these cows are infected with foot and mouth. disease, say a dairy cattle, but then mill production has dropped by more than 70 percent. how and why did couldn't become so obsessed with this law? we were giving them a tool to hold the corrupt individuals in human rights abusers accountable. they're gonna rip this deal apart if they take the white house in 2025. what is the world hearing what we're talking about by american today?

your weekly take on us politics and society. that's the bottom line. ah, now jazeera, with every oh, discover a way of difference and determination. i'm coming down with me, but we are moving to treat shop soldiers among the 16 people with corruption and compassion al jazeera world, a selection of the best films from across our network of channels for.