is blowing across the mediterranean and some rain blustery winds pulling across pots of grease cream, seeing the worst of that on wednesday, it does start to ease, however, we'll see sunshine in athens through to thursday. that's your weather update. ah. from the al jazeera london broadcast center to people in thoughtful conversation, i got much worse racism when i was at the university of oxford, which really scared me because i was like these people are going to be in positions of power with no host and no limitations. empire is the reason that we live in a multicultural society part 2 of 5. the shaheen and adam rutherford studio v. unscripted. on out his era, russia's invasion of ukraine has caused thousands of deaths and destroyed entire cities. western countries of answer 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 hello and welcome to the program i'm 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 2020 to the west main weapon against russia was sanctions. but a year later, many western nations are sending arms and military equipment to ukraine, while the war rages, keith has been winning battles 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 weapons like

a craft closure leg beschler, geese dogs. shrinking. 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 me out, a form of fists of tanks of mr. freedom, which will not allow to in his rise. again, my am going to post a change that we have to open the supply long range missiles to ukraine. and it's important that we expand our corporation in artillery and we have to start applying across to ukraine. this is our dream with our task vp or some western nations have criticize germany for the delay in sending battle tanks to ukraine as a result of internal political division. some politicians are wary of military involvement abroad and a risk of wider conflicts. he figure lice, did we, under all finance, we have provided aid is have others financially humanitarian and also with arms deliveries that is our obligation. at the same time, we have done everything we can to prevent the conflict from escalating because that

would affect the whole world if it lay to a wall. or russia says that by supplying ukraine with arms, western countries are directly involved in the conflict. which had 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 involvement of these countries or the nato alliance in our stills is going on ukraine. we categorically disagree with that. moscow use everything that the alliance and the capitals they've mentioned are doing as direct involvement in the conflict. 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 insult and both asked his host to follow the example of germany, sweden, in norway and change its policy on supplying weapons abroad. the u. s. 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 piri, a senior lecturer, insecurity at bath university. is also a former british army officer and former nato adviser. and in my yorker is benjamin talus, a senior research fellow at the, our fed vaughn 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 court. let me start with you as we approached the 1st anniversary of the ukraine war we've seen massive western military aid to keith 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 certainly directly bolden culture the supply military i to supply and intelligence to train your crime. you troops that might be special policies in both written in the conflict that your current what is already it's lashan. conflict on the west is deeply involved in it. the slightest step is, is another escalade trista quite clearly, but largely about it's not so much the actual practical proposals or practical policy has been decided. it doesn't work so much because i thought the oldest new

equipment has been promised will actually reach the back of the time and in sufficient quantities to actually make a significant difference. the city situation, what does worry about is all the talk, the surrounding the supplies and the told us representing them any more now is the west can do it likes in relation 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 source. we should do whatever it takes to make sure to ukraine. so we just look so what that points to is a for escalation. what's 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 does develope in relation to your current 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 listen, it international warranty 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 the 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 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 of 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 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 into an international law. and then secondly, looking because jeffrey seemed 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. on the practical of 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 was asking for patriot air defense back in march 2022 old i got was handheld javelins and unto jenkins and stan, stingers, et cetera, and body armor. so it's been a slow process. but i think the problem is really here from an 8 o 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 i 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 for talking about the public is that the government is not doing enough, not doing enough quickly enough to support ukraine, which they see as clearly being in germany's interest to do. now. that's not necessarily been the position of the shult johnson who had 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 check 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, 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 won't 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? sorry for ukraine, yet. it's not the germans. it's very clearly the shells,

chancery and a function of the asp date. democratic party here, or 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 to 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 shelf re clinging to the world of yesterday, where they could do business, who they wanted. they could outsource their energy to russia, that security to the u. s. and trade to china. and that's not going to be a viable proposition if you crane wins a decisive victory, which is what a lot of the allies about why we saw reluctance from the german government to, 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

course of the war, but that to me, strikes me as the most plausible reason behind the light. 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? what? no one knows what a 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 they will be absolutely cast properly close to main victim. and that miscalculation, if we did cross red lines and there was a major escalation to will make it that miscalculation low would be you crying. i think protein is acting 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 to try and do that that's, that's what worries me. i responded to benjamin. yeah, i got

a reason that shots was reluctant to to, to take this step of a great 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 in favor 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 want to see, so i want to see will end and i will settle. i'm afraid you're responding to patrick said i just, i wish i could show his confidence in that they're going to control this process. because all the way through the war, 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 what they're going to do next. right. let me 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 weapons supplies continue to go ahead? no, i'm not convinced. and, you know, it's, it's time to his, 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 going to have to use their own reserves to hold the line while these new times come on stream. but ultimately, you know, i think putin is going to have to decide, you know, that there's a 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 culture. yeah, we saw that in, 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 at 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 they'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 would essentially show up 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. if the russian air force count, deal with it over you great, that's the russian air force. when friends on these, on the way to thing, we're going to make you think, patrick, these new weapons, are they going to help you crazy? we 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 gonna 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 will calm, 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 arman brigade to push 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, ends up or you're in the 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 happen before that. but once that happens, 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 me, but what we do know is this is that there's been a whole series of western want to weapons. and you know, starting with a strong, i'm almost tripling says sevens now with the 70 times. and the old is the success of why to one the workman's was supposed to change the direction of or strategic like you crazy. but i haven't worked so far. the russians have destroyed thousands, thousands of ukrainian tanks on recalls. and is there a reason to expect they're not going to be able to deal with the slightest way before time on this program i was was where 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 west, into a lot with russia. let's allow benjamin to respond. benjamin, thanks very much. indeed. yet this 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. your 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 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. wolf 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 that from russia side, they have no way to go with this against nights 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 deterrents both way. all right, jeffrey,

your response to that and what evidence is there that is actually winning this war? now the evidence is what's happening on the grounds, particularly in the dumbass. the evidence of the free pass and additional reserve is site glass. since these are you current successfully, you currently encounter fences in which i'm being brought to bear. but the evidence of the huge casualties that ukrainians are a suffering. i'm what you think you're going to so a about these types. what what, what, what, why, why do you think crimes a desperate to get me? because the russians destroy all the previous times and all the cause, what from what i did this stuff. so i don't know is that they had, they had 900 going into the, into the war, and then they have lost about 400. yeah, they've also captured $500.00 times pack patrick, patrick, patrick,

that is not the case. right. that's not because they've lost many, many, many more than that and he tons of casualties. yeah, let's talk about these biggest the rush to suffer to test is my estimate. they might have $20000.00 that might might be enough. 80000 in missy angel, that 100000 countries was been the cause of the crimes, at least a 100000 debt. some people say i've been 50000. that might be true. and several under fossil law, i've been wounded, so you credit casualties 3 or 4 times higher. ok, russian. so that's a bunch when you listen as well. that's what we are in this. i don't, certainly from my understanding is you know, that the casualty rate, the russians are probably over 30000 dead and then a 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 in included, are we not that. ok. obviously you have to see if i'm landing her packet 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 i saw so i know that comment is never been retracted, never been rejected. ok, 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 presidents lensky se just looking at jenny. specifically kat can germany cope with the pressure of demand without sacrificing its own defenses. yes, and as a 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 made 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 miss information that's being supplied by certain other contributes as 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, it went down wrong or your judgment might not want to do no, no, excuse me, of misinformation, different misinformation, that's completely wrong or it is out today. everyone sharing 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 a bit of independence. i think 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 that the longer it song, the worst, it's going to be all you cry. a lot of people are christian and unfortunately, because look, get a y 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 the soon as possible. i want to see saw a piece, the conversation. i want to central much that can actually psycho, you know, you christ, future, sorry. say i depends, but i think we're talking about things and i really do 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 into 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. the 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 got 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 bearing at the moment. so you've got to respect that and, and yes, so i think that maybe at the end of the summer that we will see there might be a space or window of opportunity for some sort of a settlement. but it can well drive on no. annette, it is a tragedy, it's an absolute tragedy's, a human tragedy. for 1st and foremost, ok, that is not a view crane's make. a benjamin tallahassee or what ways could the conflict go? i think it's very important to listen to ukrainians on that. i agree with patrick just just said ukrainians. don't want a negotiated 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 territory 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 ukrainians say what they consider to be victory is russia completely out of that territory? so not 21st of february borders, 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. undermine democracy. jeffrey, you've got the last word. where is this conflict headed? i think it's probably had he in, in the direction that some to patrick outlined just just a, just a mom because that's probably the most terms are realistic about our friendship with this point towards law. seattle 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 life site. ukraine will be in a much stronger position in terms of any p settlement. danny danny 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 spot some kind of patient exam as we'll have to make it there because we have run out of time. thank you so much for a great discussion. geoffrey roberts, benjamin talus 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 him back to avoid the whole team hearing doha, thanks for watching bye. for now. a ah and a city defined by military occupation. there's never been an arab state, he with the capital of jerusalem. everyone is welcome. but as the default structure of that main thing they called all the projects, that's what we refused. a was one of the founders of a settlement with this and the story of jerusalem through the eyes of its own people, segregation, occupations, discrimination, injustice. this is upper thigh to the 21st century. jerusalem, a rock and

a hard place analogy, 0 african story from african perspective. a mint condition, select wireless, cuz you with a short documentary from african filmmakers for booking, a fast filled and heading for me. it's really important to teach. the present comes in bill something that i can be proud of, the pain tips and she hands that africa direct on algebra. ah, more bodies are pulled from the rubble of a mosque and pakistan that came under attack and pis shower. at least 93 people were does.