asked her to send satellites into orbit their 3rd one to lion join sweden's king and prime minister to cut the ribbon at the spaceport. easy range. it's an extension of an existing facility in the arctic officials hope to have their 1st launch in 2020 for the current geopolitical situation. not least, of course, the russian invasion of ukraine has demonstrated how important it is. but the european union has access to space as range unique, geographical position and long service makes it ideal for launches of satellites in polar orbits and other space activities. no amount to city football or benjamin mandy has been found not guilty of 6 counts of rape and one count of sexual assault or trial lasting 6 months. the jury was unable to reach verdicts on 2 other charges . one count of rape and another of attempted rape. and now face

a re trial on those 2 charges. city suspended and stopped paying amend the after he was arrested in 2021. ah, this is out here and these other top stories. russia says it now has full control, the eastern ukrainian town of sonata, and what would be its 1st gain in a dumbass region since july, where keith denies that saying the fighting isn't over. vigilant. villarreal i am on the evening of january, the 12th, the liberation of solid owl was completed, the town important for continuing the russian advance on don. yet sk taking full control of solid, are unable to russia to cut off the ukrainian forces and supplies in battle. what which is located to the south west from solid r and after that to block and, and circle the ukranian army divisions that remain there. a gas python connecting lithuanian latvia has exploded gas operator amber grid says there is no immediate

evidence of an attack. and thereby, village was evacuated, but no injury or death were reported. a great court has dropped espionage charges against 24 activists involved in rescuing migrants. citing procedural errors. the ruling came hours after united nations calls the charges to be dropped. brazil supreme court will include 4 were present. i have also know this investigation into this week's right in the capital, priscilla, thousands of his supporters stormed and ransacked the main government buildings demanding the ousting of president lewis and i said, look, the silver various chief prosecutor has launched 11 inquiries into the deaths of civilians to a nation wide protest, at least $47.00 people were killed in unrest on, on the ousting of former president petro castillo last month on friday, present dina below r t a had to replace 3 top cabinet members and they resign the response to the violence u s present,

joe biden has told japanese prime minister from here cuz shita washington remains strongly committed to its alliance with japan. because she, there is on a global tor aimed at boosting long standing alliances in the face of racial security threats from china and north korea. those are your headlines. news continues here and i'll just say that's after upfront me. what is one of thailand's most decorating hops? li, the country in fear of his life. it prod, investigation, $1.00 oh, $1.00 east revealed explosive allegation of police corruption. went out to 0. in 1971, a military analyst by the name of daniel ellsberg leaked to the press. a 7000 page top secret pentagon study and covering years of official lies about u. s. military involvement in the vietnam war. the leak documents, known as the pentagon papers were instrumental in exposing the scope and strategy

behind the u. s. is war in the region, and many at the time believed they could change how the world viewed war decades later as conflicts re john and ukraine, yemen in ethiopia, just to name a few. the decision making process behind wars remains as murky. is that what we do know is that billions of dollars are spent on weapons and defense contracts every year, making conflict incredibly profitable result. so will benefit from war. and who are the biggest players behind the war machine and up front special. but daniel ellsberg ah, daniel ellsberg, thank you so much for joining me on up front. thank you for having a large part of your life's work. has been committed to not only raising awareness about the dangers of nuclear weapons, but also the money behind them. in 20. 20 is. the pandemic raged the 9 nuclear weapons. states collectively spent an estimated $72000000000.00 on nuclear weapons

. and we're now living in a time when the danger of nuclear war, of course, has spite. where does this leave the movement for nuclear disarmament given how much money is at play and all of this, what was kept us from having any real effect on reducing the danger of nuclear war all these years. and no one was quite effective in helping stop the above ground testing and then even the underground testing eventually. but in other respects, it really hasn't been very effective. and i don't think the movement was as conscious as it should be of the money behind judging the effect that had on congress. they really acted as so. it was just a question, what people watch which was tool void nuclear war, or rob, ah, just political, strategic aspects of it is not needed. it's dangerous and so forth. but it came very little attention to the role of companies like allowing lockheed raytheon, general dynamics. and job he is as if far they really want to factor. it's like

talking about climate without talking about the exxon corporation or shell or chevron. and actually that is the weight climate is talked about pretty much. we just don't fish fact that we are facing a large flows of money directed at keeping the status quo, which is the status quo of extreme nuclear danger, especially in times of crisis like this and of climate movement toward an abyss. basically, the end of our current civilization are great reshuffling people around the world in talk about the threat of nuclear war in this abyss that we're headed toward. and that's certainly a piece of another piece of it. is war in armed conflict that's taking place right now. is plaguing multiple countries. you can get ukraine, you got yemen, you got some malia, you got the ethiopia list goes on. but behind wars like that are

a weapons industry that you just alluded to. that was worth $531000000000.00 worldwide in 2020 and as of this recording, while the basin of ukraine intensifies the stock prices, general dynamics lockheed martin. as you mentioned, northrop grumman, arethia, and they recently hit their 5 year hive. so as we talk about war, we also have who benefits from war? can you help me unpack that a little bit? who's really benefiting? is the older latin slogan, coolie, bono, who benefits are going all the way back? when will you can nameless call? we were last century world war one, the loans by j. p. morgan to the british for arms, for the british, it had to deal or even had lost the war to some extent. j. p. morgan would have gone bankrupt and wilson, our president then, could not allow that to happen. that would have been a financial disaster. and that goes on from there on, in particular whoa,

whoa, who benefited from vietnam going on as long as it did, or afghanistan. right now, the war that were supporting in yemen through arms to saudi arabia and the new e is keeping it truly genocidal. war going on are enormous massacre. and i think with very little benefit except to the arms manufacturers. people ask, why don't we learn from our failures in vietnam and afghanistan and elsewhere in the answer is, who has a lesson to learn those for us, we're very profitable for that. people you name for lucky, raytheon, northrop grumman and the others are they have anything to learn. i'm afraid that right now, there's 2 major purposes that will keep the war that can keep the war and ukraine going. as long as the war in afghanistan, not in the way that is being waged now. but by a kind of guerrilla we're,

we're supporting that we support, as we did against the soviets in afghanistan for 10 years. and the f ukrainian people would be ground to bits in the course of that as the afghans were. and yet, it's very comfortable for people who are supplying those weapons and keep going. there is one other major motives that effects these things in particular in europe . and that is that higher us role in europe who are not after all a european nation. and we have no particular rule in a european union. but in nato, that's as the mafia says, cosa nostra our thing. we control natal pretty much, and nato gives us an excuse and a reason to sell enormous amounts of arms to now to the formerly warsaw pact, nations which had only 2nd raid or obviously soviet weapons altogether from the moment that the berlin wall came down,

lockheed representatives were in warsaw showing them on a need for f 20 tunes and for other weapons right there. against who as the russians are reasonably asked. actually, russia is an indispensable enemy in your nothing else can rancho. it's the same noble enemy that, that, that's, that fascinating language. break that down for me, the, an indispensable. and what does that mean? it means that you can't really justify new trident submarines or i, she be m's that northrop grumman is making a whole new life. she be up against ian or isis or i l. cater. ah, nature sto, cottage as rationale for multi 1000000000 now dollar arms budget. only russia has to targets any sophisticated arms to fight against. you don't need advanced 5th generation fighters against people who don't have any aircraft or fighters of their

own, or sophisticated ones, but russia and now china and for the future in particular, to offer noxious arrival or a competitor, but shown who could be painted as an enemy against whom you have to defend. and of course, put now in the last shoe once has just been a bonanza for the armed people. because last you've made a russia look an offensive i enemy of some kind. who has to be defended against, with the latest weapons, with new weapons. and of course, russia has its military industrial complex to maintenance fast. they remind me of the black arts poet, gills got herons that everybody loves peace. the problem is you can't make no money off of it. you know, in the past few months, more than 5600000000 dollars has been poured into ukraine in the form of military aid from the u. s. from the u. k. and from the

e. u. we seen similar situations in the past when u. s. arms were used by libyan in syrian opposition groups. but what happens when those conflicts are over or seemingly over? oh, where did the weapons go? iraq church, it's a long time before these contracts are over. as you know, in afghanistan, it went on for 20 years, and it could good much longer. in libya, what we did was supply a lot of weapons to people who, in turn, sold them to other insurgencies in the, and terrorist groups and others throughout africa and elsewhere. and of course, our efforts in afghanistan armed in effect against the soviets isis, or i'll should say al cater and then later isis. so he things have low back effects . ah, heaping in mine. he didn't have these amps industry. so it would be wrong to say they didn't invade ukraine. cooking did that. however, they, in their people,

they were influencing and the government were willing to risk a war like this coming from their policies, which were in fact provocative. in terms of making it likely that the russians, any russian leader would eventually react against it. however, illegally trust as we reacted when khrushchev put missiles in cuba, jewish retires, and those missiles did not, in fact threaten our security. and i say that as someone who was looking at precisely a problem in the pentagon, at that time working for his mcnamara said, hey, it's not a security problem, missiles into what? it's a political problem. political good. i want to nick, this is somewhat at this stage, foreseeable, right? i mean after thing, what happens in syria with thing? what happens in libby or we, as you've done, we could go back decade prior. the weapons end up in the hands of folk who as physically we wouldn't want to have them. and yet we continue either to fund them

directly or by proxy. so i guess the question for me is, why do we allow it to happen in ultimately? what happens to these weapons? what kind of considerations given to what happens to these weapon? well, it comes down to who the we is that we're talking about. i, it's not just, it's not a century, the taxpayers or the citizens who are, by the way, regrettably willing to, she had deaths of others who don't look like us. ukraine is getting much more concerned about the casualties in the war crimes because it is not a brown muslims that are being victimized share by the russians in this case. but it's white christians and that they're like us and to see they're in such anguish and terror that creates a public pressure that i wasn't here before. but in all of these other cases. and so should, oh, what's the problem?

we hear that matters. the ones that provide the large campaign contributions and it provides the personnel at high levels and these ranks benefit fine from them. there's no problem. i may not be very successful, but he failing war is just as profitable as a winning one in fact. and so it's better because it goes on forever. as you see, the winning is over tree with when you say the libby is, it is the prime example i where and you could say to some extent, afghanistan where the weapons fanned out to other people. it provided opponents to an adversaries, but is that bad? multiple adversaries are also good for the military industrial complex, not only in our country and in europe as well. it's not only americans who sold these weapons, though it is mainly ollie's, oversee the french, the others. and the russians have big arms markets in the world. according to the

institute for policy studies last year, the average american taxpayer gave about $2000.00 to the military with over $900.00 going to corporate military contractors in contract, the average taxpayer contributed about 27 dollars to the centers for disease control and prevention and barely $5.00 to renewable energy. how do you advocate for peace when so much taxpayer money is going to will call it the 5th. republicans in particular, are very resistant to spending on social welfare or of any kind for people or anything that in any way seems to compete with private industry. the one thing you can get republicans to budget money for is allegedly

national security, even though almost none of these weapons actually add or even relevant to our national security. but they are relevant to making threats against russian. you need russia later, china will be good enough militarily to serve that purpose of the necessary, the indispensable enemy. but now it was hard to keep the cold. we're going fully at full speed with russia as an enemy in the ninety's, in the early part of the century. so now it's back and was back before the attack on russia. but now kootenai has fit into that in a way that i think was not unwelcome to our military industry. if they didn't actually wanted. i'm sure they could even count on russia actually invading another country like to have russia objecting and complaining and posing and threatening to invade, as he did a whole year ago with, with,

with troops on the edge of ukraine and embarrass all that was good for business and it doesn't, by the way, it doesn't justify putin's aggression at all. he's did to have reason to feel in the longer run, threatened russian security in terms of weapons so close to their borders, like the weapons in cuba that we objected to. kennedy had no regiment reason for threatening to adventure on that and russia has had no legitimate recently for grading craig, but time. nevertheless, we've pursued a policy that was warmed against. going back to the mid ninety's by george kennon, another c founder of the cold war. and trish who should issue an indescribable error blunder mistake to make an enemy out of russia

by moving especially into ukraine. some of the u. s. as top spies and military generals with ties and defense contractors end up as intelligence analysts on various news channels when they retire. for example, former c, i a director john brennan became embassies senior national security and intelligence analysts. as you say, connecticut when you're going to say, and former c i a director michael hayden became a national security analyst for c n n a. how much does this compromise what the public is told about war? what else? what that stake? well, it depends which you think the purpose of function that media is in times of war in our military society. their function pretty much is true. so the public on the need from war weapons and the need to intervene in this country are media is ultimately controlled by major corporations like general electric, ah, for a long time. and joe, many other conglomerates basically themselves recognize for consist of

big business. and as i say, war is good business for the media and joe, for the administration, even when it's failing. so hoof sure. i'm answering your question. it's natural for them to hire these people if their message is to get propaganda out, who better to do it, then the military or the she a people, if you want, endless war, which in effect, the wish has wanted. and that's something what happens, right. what happens when citizens are only told the truth about war after the wars are over? after government information is leaked after information is the classified. it seems like we only get this under extreme and unforeseeable circumstances and the people were trying to conceal it. so what does it mean for us? well, the kinds of information that we needed to blood vietnam was represented by such as

the pentagon papers, which was a study of vietnam decision making from 45 to 6768. i put that out 1st starting in 69 and then through the newspapers and 71. so that was somewhat belated, but not too long. but i put on trial for a possible 115 years in prison. and so down quite a few people, i didn't see any other big leech like that for 39 years until chelsea manning put out hundreds of thousands of files on his canister. and in iraq. and she spent 7 and a half years in prison. ed snowden, for his revelations, essential revelations of criminality. why the national security agency, the universal surveillance, not only in our country but around the world, but where it wasn't so illegal, but definitely in some constitution in america. and so essentially

a lifetime exile. so these people and daniel haile revealed the drone program or they did what they should have done just as i think i did what i should have done, but everyone has paid a penalty. very heavy penalty nodded my chase nixon actually committed so many crimes which happened amazingly, almost miraculously to become revealed towards the end of my trial that kept me from having to go to prison as he had intended with the others and say either exile or prison and that just purchase you mentioned chelsea, man and he of course leaked information through with you leaks and now it looks like we can found drilling a size is being expedited to the united states and weekly published of course classified information including document. it's both of us war crimes in iraq and afghanistan. and publishers were integral to the information that you liked about the vietnam war. so i'm curious from your perspective,

what happens if that president that you spoke to is said that allows governments to dictate what can and can't be published? well, you from a clue this way. it threatens to create a new, as chris is not distinguishable from russia. today with julian, a sorry, ah extradited if he hasn't yet been expedited, but it was expedited and prosecuted convicted here. we will have had the 1st instance of an actual journalist i hadn't been imprisoned for putting out the truth . i was the 1st source, former official to give information like that to jury was and i was put on trial for. but no journalist is ever been put on trial. thanks to our 1st amendment, friedman chris and treatment speech, which most countries don't have as a law or a. it will be essentially rescinded if julian sanchez, successfully,

prosecutor. and we will then approach the state control of information such as we're seeing in russia today. all of these cases of course, demonstrate the importance of exposing the truth about what's happening when it comes to war in other matters. and of course, your leaking of the pentagon papers is a prime example of that. but today, we have an expansion, arise even of this information and it's hard to decipher what's true, what's not, what's fact, what's fiction? how important is it to have actual transparency when it comes to government actions and government decisions about war? i'm afraid that transparency and war are 2 words don't really go to each other. they don't exist together. in war time, the secrecy that the government carries on all the time about its own crimes and

lies in misleading statements in bad predictions. reckless actions that secrecy is certainly legitimized in war because you have to keep it from an enemy. that's one of the senses in which i said at least, are indispensable, especially as it's a long term, once in a, in a cold war, we have to keep things from the russians altogether. so you don't, you don't get transparency. and when people do come out, there's 2 native, if they do get prosecutor when it's coming out of the sick, part of it, which is very dismaying, is nothing much happens. it may affect public opinion to some extent component. the thing doesn't try policy or whether a word can be ended or not. i hoped it would. in fact, in my case, nixon was so concerned that i might put out his secrets, which i did have, but i didn't have documents to prove it. but he thought i had documents and just

shut me up. he did domestic crimes against an american me, which actually figured far more politically in the millions of other people we were killing in vietnam. but a crime against an american counted more. unfortunately, when these things have come out, i have to say not much is change. so there's a problem with the audience, with the citizenry. you could say with our species. and i actually, i do say that our willingness to support unquestioningly a leader, especially when he or occasionally she can point to somebody threatening security. and she has to set down public information about it in order to people go along with that pretty well. and when they find out it, not too many of our own soldiers are getting killed, as if canis,

then they let it go on indefinitely, as chance them was 20 years. ukraine. i think if it, if it devolved down, if the russians came in, war didn't get out, which i don't expect them to, to wish, and others will be supporting a guerrilla war which could be as cost through to the ukrainians. as the guerrilla war, that the movie dean put up that we supplied against the soviets in afghanistan, that cost a 1000000 and a half afghan lives. and i would hate to see that imposed on the ukrainian people one under any circumstances. i've been through a war like that in vietnam, and i saw what we did to insurgence in the way a bomb pushed several 1000000 lives that has not yet been the price in afghanistan, no matter what, what we're hearing about or crimes which it will could be so and negotiated outcome in which concessions are made on both sides. however,

unsatisfactory might look to many people on both sides could save hundreds of thousands to millions of lives. and i would like to see that happen. i don't think it will though. i don't think it will. wow. and on that, so bring note, i want to thank you for your time, daniel ellsberg. thank you for joining us on a thank you. all right, everybody, that is our show up front. we'll be back with the world economic forum returns to dabble since january to assess the global economy reshaped by the pandemic. and the war in ukraine can lead us from government and business, prevent a promised decade of action becoming a decade of uncertainty. extensive coverage on al jazeera african narratives

from african perspectives could be from one in a british guy. defend to be a good flight. a new series of short documentary by african filmmakers from kenya, nigeria and rwanda. martin toys, i would love to talk some more conservation from adam joy in the traffic and feeling the gay africa direct on al jazeera. i just did as our country. we high poverty rates with inequality, and these are here. the boat is not an exception. many of the footballers in this country come from poor areas such as this was many of the members of argentina, national team come from places such as this one where the football field do not have to rush. but the soil, just like the one that you can see right here, we've been talking to some of the children that live in this place. and they said

that they would love to follow the steps of your dell missy. be mighty. yeah. and other members of the national team a new generation of young people are making demands to rebalance society, welcome to generate contains a global series, the attempt to understand and challenge the idea that mobilize you around the world, in london to act with a tackling the root causes of youth violence. many young people perpetuated violence against other young people themselves have also been victim multiple times . my generation can try me design and we shape this generation change on al jazeera ah, to russia says it's.