completely engulf sri lanka. by the time we get into choose day that wet weather starting to creep its way into southern parts of india by the time we get into wednesday. but north of this much kira possibly some fog issues with being comfortable in one's own skin is a birthright. or at least it should be a black film make a raised by white parents in east berlin. in the 19 sixty's embarked on a stunning journey of self discovery, a touching tale of family identity, lifelong secrecy, and reconciliation becoming black. a witness documentary on al jazeera, russia's invasion of ukraine has caused thousands of deaths and destroyed entire cities. western countries have answered keys, please whole military aid. does this mean the conflict has become an international

one and what are the risks of escalation to a wider war? this is inside, so ah. flow and welcome to the program, am fully by table. the war in ukraine has reached a scale that hasn't been seen in europe since world war 2, before the invasion. in february 2022. the west main weapon against russia was sanctions. but a year later, many western nations are sending arms and military equipment to ukraine by the war rages. keith has been winning battle was on the diplomatic front. berlin has finally given the green light for german made leopard 2 tanks to be deployed. but just as that agreement was reached, ukraine's focus has shifted to other weapons like aircraft closure, like

a bench with gift. oh sure. sure it is. the key now is speed and volume. the speed of training our military and speed of supplying tanks to ukraine. the amount of tank support well to form of fists of tanks, a fist of freedom, which will not allow to needs rise again. you might be going to put the china. we have to open the supply long range missiles to ukraine and its importance to expand our corporation in artillery, and we have to start applying across to ukraine. this is our dream with our toss pp . or some western nations have criticize germany for the delay in sending battle tanks to ukraine. it's a result of internal political division. some politicians are wary of military involvement abroad and a risk of wider conflicts. he figured i should be under, i'll finance, we have provided aid as if others, financially humanitarian and also with deliveries. that is our obligations at some time we have done everything we can to prevent conflict from escalating because

that will affect the whole world if it later. a wall of russia says that by supplying ukraine with arms, western countries are directly involved in the conflict which both european capitals and washington keep saying that the delivery of various kinds of weapons systems, including tanks to ukraine. absolutely does not mean the government of these countries or the nato alliance in our facility is going on ukraine. we categorically just agree with that. moscow use everything that the alliance and the capital they've mentioned are doing as direct involvement at the complex. we can see a growing so where are the weapons coming from? more than 30 western nations have sent arms and military equipment since the beginning of the war. the u. s. is the largest single contributor pledging more than $25000000000.00. germany is next followed by the u. k. their promise miss isles, rocket launchers, drones battle tanks and other armored vehicles. russia has been using iranian

drones, which it says were bought before the war. the u. s. has accused north korea supplying weapons to the russians. something young young denies. nato is also widening his call for military support for ukraine. on a visit to south korea, nato's chief n stilton berry asks his host to follow the example of germany, sweden, in norway, and change its policy on supplying weapons abroad. the us has been supplying weapons from its stock pile in israel. ah, well, let's bring in august. now for today's show in court, we have jeffrey roberts, who's emeritus professor of history at the university college cork from bath, were joined by patrick fury, a senior lecturer insecurity at bath university is also a former british army officer and former nato advisor. and in my, your car is benjamin talus. a senior research fellow at the r fed von oppenheim center for the future of europe,

which is based in berlin. a warm welcome to you all. thank you so much for joining us. geoffrey roberts, in cork, let me start with you as we approached 1st anniversary of the ukraine war we've seen massive western military 8 to keep is the arming of ukraine by the wes, bringing us ever closer to a wider international war. our western countries now effectively directly involved in this conflict, will shortly directly bolden culture to supply military discipline and intelligence to train your crime. you troops that might be special forces in both written in the conflict on the your current. what is already international conflict. on the west, deeply involved in it. the slightest step is, is another escalator quite clearly, but largely about it's not so much the actual practical proposals or practical policy that's been decided. it doesn't work so much because i thought all this new

equipment has been promised will actually reach the back of the time and in sufficient quantities to actually make a significant difference in the city situation. what does worry about is all the talk that surrounding the supplies and the told us representing them any more now is the west can do it likes in relation to the, to your crime as a site you can have no, that's not red lines. we can do what we, what we should be intimidated by any for it's coming from the russian sauce. we should do whatever it takes to make sure that you took a look. so what that points to is for escalation. what's going to be next? let's get him on the long run to the craft. maybe direct wasn't involvement. yes. so, so it's a very, very worried different a development from the problem to get the logic of escalation. how this developing relationship patrick theory. do you agree with jeffrey who says that we are already in an international conflicts and that this could lead to

a wider escalation in fact, the supplying of weapons by the west to keep? well, if it's an international war into states, go to war against each other and that as simple as that. so russ invaded you brain and as an international or at least not you. yeah. would you jeff? of course. and he's right, there are people in the west just as there are in russia, you know, calling for, well, you know, really quite harebrained approaches, you know, and better is that use of nuclear weapons inside you grain, or whether it's the people, especially in the state to think that you can really lean into this without any consideration of your enemy, essentially, and just go for broke. and there's a whole piece here a course about how did we get we get into this situation, which both the west and ukraine have contributed to. but so unfortunately, has russian and russia now exposed itself by invading and crossing into ukraine and trying to subjugate, to convey exposed itself to, to the consequences of that action. and so it's the one that sort of took the lead

from that, from the, from the situation being relatively stable to being in international law. and then suddenly looking, because jeffrey seems to say that we are heading towards a wider conflict. yes. international between ukraine and russia, but we are heading into a wider conflict. he says that could involve perhaps out of countries directly. i don't see that yes. and the theory of who opposes towards extremes and the practical practicalities of war. for example, you sent tanks, but then to protect the tanks, you need jets to, to fly overhead to keep the russian air force way. it pulls to escalation to, i think though, on the other hand, actually the people in charge rather than some of those pushing narratives have been very, very cautious. look how long it's taken. you know, ukraine was asking for times back in march. 2022 is asking for patriot air defense . back in march, 2022 old i got was handheld jennifer limbs and onto jenkins and steph, stingers, etc, and body armor. so it's been a slow process. but i think the problem is really here from an asian perspective,

they have to, they've got a very credible ally who's fighting for the wrong territory against an invading force, which is broken international. so in some ways, if you don't stand up for values here, what do you do? interesting, let me get benjamin's thoughts on this. has been a lot of debate within germany. of course, benjamin about whether they should be involved more in the ukraine conflicts. there was a lot of discussion about whether or not to supply these leopard 2 tanks to, to ukraine, which to chance there was opposed to what is the biggest concern for germans today in regards to this conflict? well, actually, i think the biggest concern for a lot of germans we're talking about the public is that the government is not doing enough, not doing enough quickly enough to support ukraine, which they see is clearly being in germany's interest to do. now. that's not necessarily been the position of the shelter. johnson who have been very reluctant and hesitant, and the the cost of that delaying can be measured in ukrainian lives. these tanks

have been requested since april last year, when the republican polen 1st supplied main battle tanks to, to ukraine. and it's 10 months later that they've actually been given the go ahead . there's the rock and there are concerns about escalation and all the way up to nuclear escalation, but a lot of people fail us, so that's just falling into rushes nuclear blackmail trap. there's other other issues at hand as well though, which several politicians here as well as analysts have questioned whether the sharps chancel ray actually wants ukraine to win the decisive victory. now many allies think that's really. ready to show that actually with the alliance defending democracy and standing up what's, what's right in the world. but they recognize also the transformation potential of this conflict. should one side have a decisive victory. and why would, why wouldn't been german? i'm sorry to interrupt you, because that's very interesting what you say. they. why wouldn't the germans want a direct victory for decisive victory story for ukraine? yet?

it's not the germans. it's very clearly the shells, chancery and the function of the asp date. democratic party here in germany rather because, and it's important to say they don't want you to lose either that's not the position, but they don't want a decisive victory. why? because that actually potentially has what we would call a system transforming in fact, whereby the competition between democracies and autocracies, intensifies and you really have to stand up and be counted and choose sides. and that might have all sorts of implications for germany's trade relations with china . for example, and we see the sharp re clinging to the world of yesterday, where they could do business, who they wanted. they could outsource their energy to russia, their security to the u. s. and trade to china. and that's not going to be a viable proposition if ukraine wins a decisive victory, which is what a lot of the allies about why we saw reluctance on the german government to supply these weapons to ukraine. i think it's been one of the main reasons behind it. yes, there are been so many reasons given that if evaporated into excuses over the.

ready course of the war, but that to me, strikes me as the most plausible reason behind the like. ok, jeffrey let me come back to you and pick up on something you said earlier, you talked about putting red lines. what do you think a tipping over the edge? what would be his red lines? but what no one knows what the red lines are. and we don't actually want to test out what they are because the consequences of miscalculating what have what is read like. and they will be absolutely cast properly cause the main victim of that miscalculation. if we did cross red lines and there was a major escalation to will make it. that miscalculation would be you crying. i think protein is actually with the strike because from the point of view from russia are there when the war and they are going to win. so there's no need for them to counter escalate every every, every move on to west. but that calculation could change in that sense of what was

me. i responded to benjamin. yeah, i got a reason that shots was reluctant to to, to take the step of agree to supply every tanks and danger. escalation was the public opinion, as it is in every country for western. what is the budget on your credit? yes, there are those who are paper of escalation and doing whatever it takes to to win the war against russia and to take the necessary risk. but there are others who want to prefer diplomatic solutions. the well the see. so i want to see will end and i will settle. i'm afraid you're referring to, patrick said i just, i wish i could show his confidence in the house that they're going to control this process. because all the way through the wall, it's just been one escalate 3 step ok. it's been slow and gradual, but nevertheless it took the direction of travel.

it is quite is quite, quite clear other going to do next, right. let us honestly just the last, this is patrick. what is your respond to that? and patrick, are you convinced that putin is going to back away from, from a major escalation with the west if these, these weapon supplies continue to go ahead? no, i'm not convinced. and you know, it's, it's done to his. 3 his assessment, the situation i do think is being as carefully calibrated as it can be and certainly can come fast enough for the ukrainians is too slow. even the tanks too slow, they're gonna have to use their own reserves to hold the line while these new times come on stream. but ultimately, you know, i think you putin is going to have to decide, you know, that there's the rules of the game here. essentially, which is if i conventionally invade another country and other people come to that countries a convention to help get to turf. i have to accept that because that's the net that

goes with the territory of invading another country. yeah, we saw that in, in the middle east, you know, looking to run off the invasion of iraq, for example. you know, this is just what goes on that us, that the rules of the game is, you don't use nukes. yeah. i'm when you do, if you're going to start threatening them, you have to go through the clear signals of getting your strategic you're going to force is ready. and i think the most actually dangerous point of view would have, if you grant starts to inflict a number of another, say, a double operational blow on russia this summer. then your interest here is where it essentially show what the russian miniature, the ground forces as incapable really, you know. and then that's quite, quite, quite a risky situation, much less so than if, if that, if those, if the f sixteens go in, you know, a squadron of sixteens go in to protect ukrainian events as well as the russian air force count deal with over ukraine. that's the russian air force is what the friends on the, on the way to think, what's going to make you think patrick, these new weapons, are they going to help you crazy me gain some attack,

some of the territory loss. but that's the clear thing here knows ukrainians need to whether a very hard period probably as you, as russia most likely, you know, between the spring and summer tries to attack somewhere. yeah. they're going to have to whether that, and then, you know, if you look at what armor brigades are for, which is essentially what's being pledged, and we'll call them a come on stream. but it will take time. remember gates for finding a weak spot in punching through to take back territory. and it was an armored brigade to post through rand r kids in august september. that's what it's for. there's a few places they can attack and east in the right in the center and is operator into crimea, all of which, yes can carry escalate 3 responses of course. but it's essentially, if you don't view the problem is like a belligerent here is invaded another sovereign nation. notwithstanding, all the things that happened before that. but once that's happened, you know, and then then, you know, this is, this is the rules, the game right? before i bring in benjamin back jeffrey,

i just wanted to ask you what you thought of you know, these new weapons that have been supplied. do you think they'll, they'll make a big difference on the ground. will they change a strategic situation on the ground? it's hard to tell them, but what we do know is this is that there's been a whole series of western one to weapons. and you know, starting with a strong, i'm almost tripling, says 7th, and now he's having tags and the success of why to one of the workers was supposed to change the direction to was to change your grades. but i haven't worked so far. the russians have destroyed thousands, thousands of ukrainian tanks and on on recalls. and these are very recent, you expect they're not going to be able to deal with the slightest way before time on this program i was was work. it was just very fun. i was worried about the escalation problem listening to patrick listening to patrick benjamin on even

worked out because that's exactly the kind of discourse this actually leading us into a lot with russia. let's allow benjamin to respond. benjamin thanks very much. indeed. yet this, the, an interesting discussion, a couple of points i'd really like to, to pick up on one, there is only one escalates re party in this war. and there's only one party to blame for this war, which is russia, you crimes, this desire to join a voluntary spare of integration nato. and there the european union is totally different than russia's attempt to impose this fair of influence on it. and that's precisely what democratic countries have reacted to ukraine is fighting a defensive war. and by the way, it's winning it. so i'm really going to push back very strongly against jeffrey's unfounded session that russia is somehow winning this conflict. the russian military has been humiliated in ukraine fighting a far smaller. ready force they've actually failed to achieve most of their objectives that being pushed out of the territory they have taken. and that's part

in part due to the weapons the west is provided. but in other part, due to the bravery, courage, ingenuity and scale of the ukrainian army and the, the resilience of its people. and that's precisely also what's inspired people around the west to say this is off by 2. and the check prime minister, for example, pantheon are actually very specifically wrote that in an article and everyone who does take that is being offered to exactly wants to provide you praying with what it needs to win. and that's exactly what we should do. i would push back also strongly against the suggestion of these weapons don't work. they've been consistently shown to work. and the tanks will certainly make a difference in doing combined arms with offensive maneuver wolfe, patrick riley described in ukraine, combined with a cover, they would be extremely effective. and again, russia would stand to lose. the trouble with the escalation theory is from russia side, they have no way to go with this against nature or the west. we also have nuclear weapons. we also have weapons with which we could hurt them. so that's actually the balance of, of power that we see that the parents both way. all right, jeffrey,

your response to that and what evidence is there that is actually winning this war right now? the evidence is what's happening on the grounds, particularly in the dumbass, the evidence of the free of response and additional reserve neglect. since these are you current successful your current account offenses in which i'm been brought to the evidence of the shoot casualties that ukrainians are a software, you know, what do you think you're going to do so? so about these types what, what, what, what, why, why do you think the friends are desperate to get me? because the russians destroy all the previous times and all the cause. i know what, from what i did this, this stuff. so i don't know is that that they have 900 going into the into the. busy and then they have lost about $400.00. yeah. but they've also captured $500.00

times pack patrick, patrick, patrick, that is not the case. right. that's not because they lost many, many money more than that and he tons of casualties. yeah, let's talk about these biggest rush to suffer to test is my estimate. they might have $20000.00 that might might be enough. 80000 in missy engine. oh that so a 100000 countries, a lot of in the country. all the crimes, at least 100000 some people say i'm 50000. that might be true. has several under fossil law, i've been wounded. so you credit casualties 3 or 4 times. ok and russian. so that's a bunch when you listen as well. and this is what that is. i don't, certainly from my understanding is you know, that the casualty rate, the russians are probably over 30 days and dead and then it multiple times 3 or 4 wounded. and ukraine unfortunately is still quite high. we don't get the full picture because obviously it's operational security. but the chairman of the joint

chiefs of staff in united states at reason, he reckons that the ukrainians are about a 100000 casualties. all included are really not that. ok. obviously you have to see if i'm landing her. so a packet most eventually and when she was speaking she said that there were a 100000 ukrainian offices killed in. well, that's what, that's what she has about. yes. yeah, i saw so i know that coma is never been retracted, never been retracted. okay, them, it was retracted. all right, gentlemen, let's try and move the conversation and discussion forward. benjamin i want to come to you because ukraine is now demanding more warfare. as we heard president lensky essay. just looking at gemini, specifically, can germany cope with the pressures of demand without sacrificing its own defenses. yes, and as the number of experts have made this case,

i've talked about this for a long time, also christian mailing claudia, my or 2 of the leading german experts on security of my this case, which stands for almost all the western allies actually is that what would be supplied to ukraine, would only be used to defend against russia anyway. so actually tying russia down and diminishing its forces in ukraine is a perfectly good use for these, these weapons. so that supplying them actually does the job in a more effective way. it supports democracy, it supports ukraine, and it actually degrades russia's military capabilities, which would be the only thing that be used for anyways. so they can certainly be sped and more should be sped immediately. just let me very quickly push back on what i think is really misinformation that's being supplied by certain other contributors to the show about casualties. i know you can use a

gentleman, please let. let's try and continue this discussion in a civil manner. if you want to disagree with my information, she wants down wrong or your judgment might not want to do not. you know, it may of misinformation, different misinformation that's completely wrong or it is out today. but everyone showing all the discipline of a russian mobilized unit. i suggest you get the figures right and also don't spread into ukrainian propaganda, which is what's being done. and i think it's, it's not an independent i guess i could, i please come back at least i would like to buy something. i want to clarify. i'm not pro russian, i'm pro ukrainian. what i think about this war is the longer it song, the worst it's going to play. will you cried. the lot of people are christian and unfortunate. patrick is slow, get i why in terms of western strategy, the great to the price that you crunch kinda pie. it's act western poet strategy

military spring, but it is actually no end up destroying you credit start, which is why i want to want to stop as soon as possible. i want to see saw a piece, the conversation. i want to central much the can actually psycho, you know, you christ, future. all right. say i depends. but what i feel like at the moment we're talking about, and i really don't want to get your thoughts on where we think this is headed as we enter the 2nd year. now this company is going to be a year in february, patrick, let me come to you. what ways do you see this conflicts going as the west continues on, keith? you know, could it conclude in the coming year or are we going to grind it? see this in to 2024 and see other countries directly involved? i see it. i don't think you're going to see any countries directly involved with boots on the ground. no, no, no countries, not for that. that's a different level all together. so i think it's going to try to be contained i think we can expect obviously one major maybe to major russian candor offenses

between now and the summer. we'll see how they go. a new credit is going to have to whether that storm. and i also think that you train will be pair preparing when the grands harder for their attacks to try and take back their lunch and move it. there's another no one's ready to negotiate. and you know, if the, if the ukrainians wanted to, the people want to piece that they can say that they can go for it. but i think the costs are worth firing at the moment. so you've got to respect that and, and that, yes, so i think that maybe at the end of the summer that we will see there might be a space, a window of opportunity for some sort of a settlement. but it can well drive on it. it is a tragedy, it's an absolute tragedy to human tragedy. for 1st and foremost, ok, that is not a view grains make a benjamin tallahassee or what ways could the conflict go? yeah, i think it's very important to listen to your granny and on that i agree with patrick just just said ukrainians don't want and it goes shaded solution at the moment because they don't have a trustworthy negotiating partner. and that's also

a position that's been confirmed by washington and numerous times. but also we have to ask why they don't want to exist with the parents are occupied by the russian regime. because we've seen the massacres, we've seen the brutal oppression that the russians have put on the people living in the occupied territories of ukraine. so it's very understandable when 85 to 90 percent of ukrainian say what they consider to be victory is russia completely out of that territory. so not 21st of february board is but 1991 borders. and that's precisely what we should be pushing for as well. otherwise, we sent a very dangerous precedent. we increased the likelihood of proliferation undermined democracy. jeffrey, you've got the last word where is this conflict headed? i think it's probably heading in, in the direction that some to patrick outlined. just just a moment. just a moment. i think that's probably the most terms are realistic. so some about our friendship with this point is that the war is lost. it will so long only because of

western support for you crime. without that support the war would have come to an end monster got thousands of people's lives beside you. crying will be in a much stronger position in terms of any peace settlement. danny attorney is at the present time. yes, that is up to ukrainian people in their government to whatever they want. but western citizens, their governments also have choices to my career. and my argument is, is that it needs to be a choice in favor of return to diplomacy and an effort. i see spar some kind of patient exam as we'll have to leave it there because we've run out of time. thank you so much for a great discussion. geoffrey roberts, benjamin talis, and patrick barry, thank you very much and thank you to for watching. you can always watch this program again, any time by visiting our website out there a dot com for further discussion. go to our facebook page at facebook dot com, forward slash jane side story. and of course you can join the conversation on twitter handle is that a j inside story for me,

for the battery boy halting hearing doha, thanks for watching bye. for now. a ah and in the laboratory of the dentist pharmacy in paris, medicines have being prepared. in this case it's the common antibiotic amoxicillin diona here says since people stopped wearing mosques, they are catching more infections again. so the demand for simple medication is higher and the major pharmaceutical companies cannot keep up. the problem is not just affecting simple pain killers and antibiotics across the continents. the

european medicines agency says currently 13 key drugs are in short supply. the shortage of medicine applies across europe. this berlin pharmacy staff are increasingly having to find alternative drugs to those doctors and prescribed in order to help their patients. when i'm very sick layer, we have a lot more work to do to supply the population with medicine. so far we have still somehow found a solution for people, but we often had to improvise. so sometimes we relief and not the active ingredient more strongly. it was prescribed and been have to adjust the dosage. ah, to. ready i'm tell mccrae and doha, these are the top stories on al jazeera sch. the u. s. secretary of state is calling for urgent steps to restore. com.