some wet weather, gradually, wet weather, pushing for the southern cake. and there we go. we got that wet weather making its way to ward madagascar. they started off the north, west coast of australia is pushing its way right across towards madagascar by tuesday or wednesday. ah, in syria citizens, a collecting evidence, a show of crimes committed against civilians. we've moved out of syria now about $600000.00 pages of material so that one day they can bring the aside regime to justice. it puts a human face on the charges. it's a dead human face, but it's a human face. syria witnesses for the prosecution. on al jazeera what's shaped europe security as munich hosts its annual conference. there are

concerns about the continent future with the war in ukraine, still raging. how will europeans face potential security threats? i'm, can they do it alone? this is inside stored. ah. hello and welcome to the program. i'm danny navigator. the war in europe and the new alliances of the future are some of the issues being discussed that one of the most important meetings on the international agenda. the annual munich security conference leaders on top officials from the european union and nato have been focusing on ukraine and how the war is shaping their future. while chinese and american delegations tried to resolve the recent diplomatic damage between beijing and washington, the russian president, vladimir putin is not attending the conference, but he's dominating most of the discussion. our diplomatic editor james bays,

reports from munich. the conference that takes place every year here in munich is one of the key points in the us european security relationship. that relationship has for 74 years been defined by nato, the north atlantic treaty organization, which was. busy role was originally to deter any attack from the soviet union that changed rather radically when the berlin wall fell and many european countries, eastern european countries added to the ranks of nato members. then the fears i think in europe of russia started to subside, many european countries neglected. the u. s. would say that defense budget, there was private concern about that in the us became very public. when donald trump became president, is euro wasn't pulling its weight. well that of course is all changed in the last year since the war in ukraine and european leaders. ready i think have been much of

the driving force. so what's gone on in nato, for the 1st time in the last year, many of those leaders are saying we need to support present lensky incredibly strongly talk to him, how long this will last. when the negotiations start, the message really is for as long as it takes. but i think the u. s. still has a very important role. he's still the biggest funder of nato. and in the end, the u. s. election campaign is going to be very important for the war in ukraine presidential elections in just 2 years time on a different party. a different president may have a very different view of ukraine. james phase for inside story in munich. ah, it's now welcome our guest joining us from vienna as wolfgang post i a security and policy analyst. wolfgang is a former defense attache and a senior advisor to the austria institutes for european security policy from type

a. joining us from there. i do not go back on a professor at dublin city university and author of domestic politics of post soviet unrecognized states. and over in oxford we have samuel romani who's the fence analyst and associate fellow at the royal united services institute. warm welcome to each of you. thank you so much for your time with us. on the inside story, we'll kinda go over in vienna on the issue of ukraine. perhaps this conference is giving ukraine's allies a chance to assess the war one year on. so, despite the warm words of support for keys that we've seen behind the scenes, what would the allies biggest concerns be when it comes to european security as a whole? as this war drags on to biggest security for the europeans is certainly the aggression of russia. but there is also concern about the cohesion of the rejection of the russian adventure in ukraine. please be aware that nathan fans to enlarge that. there are 2 not and you know, in countries,

sweden and finland beach would like to join nato and this is blocked by turkey. so natal is not that united as it might seem to be ok to knock on tie pay. do you agree with that that there unity is being tested in surely the countries don't all have the same concerns. no, that's true. and this debate about, you know, a future european, you know, security architecture is, is, is not you. it's been going on for some time and, you know, i guess it 1st came in recent times into the forefront when donald trump was electives. in the united states, there was a fear that the united states was no longer going to be committed in the same way to european security. and then of course, yes, russia's invasion of ukraine, which has revealed shortcomings, really in european security. not least in the ability to produce sufficient ammunition weapons, not least he of course, because of the end of the cold war. but also because if you are a crisis,

because these are democracies, people are always worrying about how their taxes are being spent. and it's difficult for politicians, certainly in peace time, to argue that the defense is, is, is worth spending money on over health and education. and what rushes invasion of ukraine has revealed is that you don't off our tearing government, which can focus its resources in a much more focused way. can be a real danger. and i think europe or, you know, made a fundamental mistake in 2014, in how it responded to the annexation of climate. you might say the 1st invasion of your brain that emboldened vladimir putin and 9 years later they're, they're back at the drawing table, trying to see how they can make amends for that and prevents. well firstly of course, getting you trained to win the war, but then prevent seminar occurrences in the future. ok, a samuel way in on this out on the security front for europe. what, what do you think of the challenges are going forward? when you get there is i just respond to the comment is heard, i substantial amount of unity in support of ukraine that we really saw at the me a security conference. it was really telling to see how germany is gone one year,

i'm opposing leave large transfer grant and at keeping defense badge extremely low to supporting more than 2 percent of g, p and defense spending. and forrest disoriented events from the zang. we mean even more. so there's been a lot of progress come forward in terms security challenges. obviously the 1st and most immediate one is preventing the great the russians, dram achieving renewed military success in ukraine. ebert killer, the offenses the launching and don bass. so artillery ammunition air defense systems and maybe even down the line fighter jets r as in joker, you ran the 2nd is on securing some of the ab that the handed it states they're coming to the european union like georgia, moldova, and making sure that they are not vulnerable to russian aggression. and the 3rd obviously, is creating a harmony as den northern europeans security france asked why resolved in the bass with turkey over sweden, finland is so important. so sweeney finland can use a substantial military resources and experience dealing with hybrid threats like cyber,

to coordinate with the baltic states and made sure that the northern flank of nato is unstable as the southern and other flanks of the alliance. ok, and a samuel, i'll stick with you for a moment because i'd like you to also comment on what a mr. tanaka said from taipei, when he was talking about the role of the united states in particular, that has been a pivotal and may so has been the major player when it comes to ukraine. so do you think that the europeans can actually rely on themselves going forward or do they continue to rely on the u. s. why does interesting question? i think the certainly the yeah, warren ukraine is exposed to limitations. i've europe's ability to produce military what men. so we see, for example, you foreign policy, she just a brow and other european officials talk about how we may have had difficulty producing the amount of ammunition needed to sustain this kind of a long range war. that's pretty realistic. so in some ways, expose the fact that the european ends cannot really defend themselves all on their own without america. but european countries are making encouraging investments in

a defense budgets that would be suggestive of a longer term in autonomy and sustainability. like i said, with germany and oversee and particularly coming from countries that are most vulnerable to russian aggression like poland, increasing the ged to 3 percent and really consolidating. there are the sources of artillery from countries as diverse as south korea, g, nato. so i think that the europeans were given a shock, but they're taking gradual and incremental action towards being more autonomous and be able to defend themselves against future threats coming from russia. okay, i will stand over and vienna. what do you think here? can your opinions live up to their pledges and take on more responsibility for their own security and, and move away from the united states? there is no doubt about it. that's the european. so we need to take some more responsibility, which is 1st and foremost because the hopes of the united states has shifted about 10 years ago to the civic and the current born ukraine. distraction for the united states from eagle checked over more important error from the pacific.

this means there is some kind of sharing the required between the united states in europe, which means the conventional defense of europe will and must, in the future rely more european forces. but it is absolutely correct that countries like germany need to do much more in the future. there is no doubt about this. nevertheless, it will still be required to have the support of the united states. we keep mentioning germany, but let's look at france for a moment and. 2 we're going dollars, i'll stay with you for this question, franz, since the beginning of the war has been accused off, simply not doing enough when it comes to ukraine. so what is it that prevent franz from doing more? well, the french military is almost the ground, found is the german military and the main role of defense of conventional defense in the sense of europe. all the rest of the united states and the germans. the

french have so many global obligations, especially in of africa about the are also need to be. so yes, of course, the french also need to do some more. but the already heavily have a heavy burden in the presence in north africa to 5 galleries. and this is also an interest of the united states to keep differential north africa and to continue to find areas. and especially i see some type of market there, which is also quite costly. the french maintain also an old looked up force, and this is also extremely costly venture to naca if they do indeed increase their defense spending. and we heard from the german chancellor, all our souls whose bowing now to a, quote, permanently meet nato's defense spending goal for individual members of 2 percent of g d p. how do you think the russians will be looking into this? because does this reinforce the sentiment amongst russia, that nato does, and will remain and exist and existential threats? yes, but of course russia what your opinion and what nature was doing is responding to

my shirt brushing aggression mean russia states, it's fear of national expansion, but it never asks the fundamental question of why neutral has expanded into inter central eastern europe. it wasn't that nature was seeking new members. essentially, those countries which had been formerly part of the russian empire of the soviet union, involuntarily were banging on the door of nasal begging for security guarantees to protect them from the historical cycle of abuse that they have received at the hands of the prevalent over many many years, and until russia changes its action or just neighbor, there's always going to be a demand. first, a strong security architecture around russia, containers, so to speak, what we sometimes get overall, which would russia as a threat because it's tried this isn't hardy, military, you know, it has the largest new to our soul. but this more has been illumination in many respects that it has revealed us, you know, russia isms, a superpower. indeed,

it's often forgotten that its economy is smaller than it means it's somewhat larger than spain's. it's g. d, p per capita is very small in all. ready other kind of important benchmarks. russia is a medium size developing power, but what it has done, and this is what dictatorships can do, is just focus a lot of those raw materials that it, that it has on the state control into military production. and what europe has moved on is it hasn't kept pace of that. russia is firing more ammunition in a day than europe is producing in a month. it's a remarkable statistic. and the estonian prime minister college has said that you're have to call it resources in the same way that it did, for example, with vaccines during coal. but it has to do the same with ammunition production. but, but there's no way to respond to discretion. but by, by essentially making your, of more secure by, by enhancements, defense production of the state. but they're not when the united states also says that the u. s. would have a permanent army base near poland. i mean,

this is not going to be well, come by russia. how does this help security in the continence while it helps security by helping the poles and, and those other countries in the neighborhood feel more secure. this isn't about just pandering to russia's security concerns that we have to ask ourselves what rights to the countries have bordering russia. they are not simply buffer states are proxies or palm beach or sovereign democracies who have elected governments who have a right to choose their own geopolitical alliances. and they have chosen for very good evidence based historical and contemporary reasons to throw in their lot with europe and with your atlantic structures. and as i said, that's something that russia should really examine why this is happening, rather than seeing it as a, as an aggression towards russia. it's a response to russian regression. and there's a lot of evidence to, to, to prove that over long periods of time. and samuel romani, if sweden and finland actually joined nato, then this would mean that russia would have nato on its border. the alliance would

have a about a 1300 kilometer border. so russia's actions created exactly or could create exactly what puts in didn't want. these are always been the record problems. so in russia started using hybrid tactics, for example, against countries like as tony add 2007 with cyber attacks or the weapons asian of energy against ukraine. it just encourage ukraine in georgia, just press interest. you need a membership precipitating the russian aggression the georgia war, and then the annexation of crime in 2014. i received the exact same scenario. play out here, russia invade ukraine. this offensively to prevent and the animals and the armed anti rush, nato member from urging on his borders and all a gets more nato expansion on his waters. it's important to keep in mind that there was no political consensus in sweden and finland towards banding neutrality before this war. and maybe only 20 or 30 percent of the populations of both countries actually were strong supporters of nato membership. so russia's aggression against the ukraine. eventual fundamental shift in the country, public opinion,

i read once again to the expansion of the alliance on the waters and samuel the did another thing, the significant innovation for european security and defense is that the you is now, of course, financing the purchase and delivery of lethal weapons to ukraine. that's a 1st and e u history. is it not on how big a game changer is? this going forward? was president his staff that really shows the general unity of your country's round army? you know, obviously there are some exceptions like hungry which says that does not want to be a party to the war. and bulgaria also has intermittently gone back and forth on this because the socialist party is much more accommodating towards russia. by general. it just shows the degree of unity around this and also we should just be looking at the armstrong is just the good looking at you efforts enters and military training for your grants. because that's also significant in terms of the degree of unity that you're saying. and not just individual member states, like, or within nato, like britain, leading ad hoc training initiatives or bring other countries together received the

you actually invest in this jail again before the war. the twenty's based, similar requests in 2021 are that for this kind of training and they didn't get it . so in terms of training and arms, all right, it's a lot of unity that we're seeing coming for the european union was going to you agree on that that we're seeing a unity in terms of whether yeah, go ahead. we forgot. there are 2 sides of the coin by no means i don't want to prevent the russian aggression or ukraine. but we said that each country has, of course, the right side if he wants to join the live, yes or no, no doubt about these. and that will agree with this. i think the russian side be perceived that this could be spread for them. be perceived that any basing of nathan, besides or maple almost closer order would allow nathan aggression, a weapon. and even more important, we st. nataline that mean stablish fees involved, they have to call the not and of course, they say things that mean to fight their own bar in boston against the people down

there and they see the same fault causal. so for us, it's be support operation or the russians. it's in garrison. i would say it would be important, but right now is not the right moment, but is to be more thrust to build some more thrust. and especially if nato enlargement works in sweden and finland are able to try and nato. and this is before, this was significantly changed cheap that she is so easy place in europe, because the russians will be fossil, people have the receipt. and if we can number troops in, it's not and frank to protect the strategic important hobble months and to call up meetings. about half of the nuclear submarines are based and from the banjo, fred by nathan, indicate of the russian aggression in central europe. so this means if the northern countries would try and nato and the russian aggression incense of your europe would be much more risky. and but sure that the russians would have much less appetite for military aggression against made. and the situation could be also used

to be some more thrust again, by having some inspections on both sides of the border and by having some common activities. so yes, the russians are the ones who are the rest of us. there is no doubt about it. but it's all about the sections and it will be necessary also to take into account the concerns mr. then i can type a, would you like to comment on what we just heard from vienna? yeah, i mean, i think there's a consensus in, in europe at the moment it's, it's not foreseeable, but you could make a deal with the current russian administration that would be enduring. you have to remember that deals have been struck in the past with this administration. and indeed, with russia, i mean, we go back even to 1994 when the russian federation guaranteed the territory integrity, the sovereignty, independence of ukraine in a binding agreement. and, and of course, that has been flagrantly ignored since then. so i think that's the big fear in ukraine and indeed within the european union, the reason to partner at the moment to establish this trust on which to build kind

of a common understanding. indeed, europe has tried out in the past the whole idea of, of nord stream and an economic engagement was that somehow russia could be changed to economic engagement. and in fact, what has been revealed is that it was the kremlin which was using a can gauge them to further east objectives. and it had kind of logged itself and the belief that europe was sufficiently dependent and divided that it wouldn't dock robustly if, if russia further extended its invasion into ukraine and doctor has proved fundamental wrong. but as you know, i mean, i'm, i'm speaking here in from taiwan. you know, there are other parts of the world who also have a vested interest in seeing ukraine when and russia, russia's invasion, be defeated. because if i gain something from this russia game, something from this invasion, it will send a signal not only to put an end to russia, but to other off our charin states that military aggression pays. so i'm glad you

bring that. i'm glad you're bring that up, but let me just put this to you, mr. zonati, because we heard from the nato secretary general, who said this, what is happening in europe today could happen in asia to morrow. to what extent do you think europeans and nato are, are concerned about any potential, let's say, cooperation between china and russia going forward? yes, that they are very concerned. and indeed, the secretary stayed on the blank and made this here where he was saying, there was a real threat of, of china providing military age to russia. because ultimately, you know, china has tried to hedge inspect the china doesn't want to see russia lose in this bottle. that's where it was a fundamental disagreement between china and the west on the, on the outcome of this, this conflict. and there are obvious parallels between somewhere like taiwan, you have an authoritarian, china, increasingly repressive at home and aggressive abroad. it's, it's, it's a dictatorship versus democracy, of course, here in taiwan and, and of course,

i was considered an integral part of china in, in a similar par, no way that russia, ukraine is kind of part of its no legitimate interested sphere of influence. so, how, how the west responds to russia's invasion of ukraine will have a domino effect in other parts of the world. there's no doubt about that. so this is why there's a lot of state european security, the future of ukraine, you know, and the outcome of this war it's, it's not confined to those areas. it's actually a global, significant samuel behind the scenes though, i do think that governments will be questioning the extent and duration of their involvement, particularly as economic pressures grow. europe is having to pay a high price. there's high inflation, increased gas cost, of course, the issue of refugees as well. so far we've seen the economic costs at the war. he inflation energy prices and dead rising food prices, for example, be much less of a deterrent for support to you grant. and many people predict it is also notable

that populous candidates, you ran on death platforms about die rainy in support for ukraine, and also not grabbing against embargo against russia like marine le, pen and france were sally defeated. whereas other candidates who have support army, grandly georgia, maloney in italy, i've been successful. so i don't think that those economic pressures are really white. you in the short term limit at washington, murphy grain, but obviously their disagreements on 2 key areas. the vs on long range missile and the 2nd has to do with fighter jets. so you see britain particularly liberation to now be pretty vocal on both of these issues and supported them. and poland also be supportive of us. but even within britain, for example, ben wallace has a very different view, is that you're a fighter taking the typhoon. jazz can only be delivered after the war questionnaire because we're open to having them being delivered during it. and other countries like germany, you're probably gonna be less willing to give that kind of equipment. so this agreement is what's going to be on whether we support granger's ammunition, artillery, and helping them economically. also hold up against the infrastructure strikes and

russian aggression is going to be more about the escalation rests, the long range miss out, the, the fighter jets in the more get his on that the little words going to take in the more you learning because i see you, shaking your head with gaming. will european countries find that politically challenging to spend more on defense when faced with an economic downturn? well, bit they both us will ask people additional to justify these. but let me have a brief point on the delivery of the chat. so you're going to build up an air force on 5 generation of chipped like the unified form. thanks. yes. so it's nice. there is no way that the 1st unified that's gotten good to be racial in ukraine before in let's see. it's best to re yes. so this is not like in and to thank you silo love, it looks like a tank that could be operation that a couple of months we're talking about. yes. so it's really was the questions. last is the threat malika priority? i don't think it is because it will be simply not available in time, but there is not also no doubt about this. if their voice grows them,

or if there is a cease fire, it will be necessary to establish, to reestablish all the ukrainians. and this is certainly something where the west and the chat needs to come to ukraine. ok, mr. to knock, i mean, what is, what is the way forward? do you think? but i think it's been a transformation in how we understand secures in europe since russia's invasion. i think one of the, i mean, if we mentioned about germany, i'm in germany open to this point. had been the most reticent in adopting a ra, a robust response to russian vision. they have changed so much in one year. i think that emblematic of the changes and thinking that have occurred. and i think one of the big takeaways is, is that geography matters, but more than jocksey values matter. and that's why i mentioned the issue of democracy versus dictatorship. this is a fundamental schism in europe. we've been down this road before of how to organize european society along the lines of the dictatorship or democracy. so there's only

one top of europe can take. there's only one key take away from that democracy is worth defending, and therefore it's worth investing in. and that's not confined to europe, as i said, it's not based. justin geographies based on the neighborhood is based on values. okay. we have somewhere to minutes, remain and we'll bank gang. you can comments. well, i would say the 1st priority is all the security office security be reconditioned by the economy by comic interests, and there are support values. if you don't have security, if you don't have the comic prosperity, you can ask for your values. i can say last sentence, these 1st munich, this is the 1st newly conference in a new age. the age of globalization is over is over europe and there is no. busy more peaceful cooperation with rob, with russia whatsoever. ok, samuel, final word to you what, what lessons can be learned from this and what's the way forward? obviously that israel i saw dirty, i think job which towards your grades preventive kind of repeat situations,

asia and hopefully this community security conference leads to a more of a long term coordination than the dresser. political pressures do not kind of really blur with national security. the way it's so often done in the past with regards to russia. just one more question to you, samuel, do you think that ukraine will join the european union? well, i think he's got a long path to, i need to be, i'm candidates that day. it's gonna be a long way towards i direct memberships of maybe some kind of an informal agreement between them that leads to greater economic integrations, probably more likely. so i think it's a long term process. okay, we'll leave it there. thank you so much for joining us. will ganga post i donica buchan and sam your money. we thank you for your time. thanks for watching. you can see the program again any time by visiting our website al jazeera dot com for further discussion. go to our facebook page docs, facebook dot com, forward slash ha, inside story. can join the conversation on twitter as well or handle is adrian side story from myself. the whole team here in doha,

thanks for watching time. bye bye for now. ah. ah. and women run micro businesses are key to center goals development and to improved food security. access to finance helps them succeed since 2014, nearly a $180.00 micro enterprises, collectives and small businesses across synagogue received concession or refinancing. these loans were made possible by an initiative administered by the q right good. will fund the q 8 fund partners in development. talk to al

jazeera, we ask, but should they not be more oversized, perhaps, of foundations like yours? we listen when it comes with diversification. we don't do it in order to beat gets wrinkled, the rational energy sources we meet with global news makers. i'm talk about the stall restock matter. on al jazeera, we understand the differences and similarities of cultures across the world. so no matter how you take it will bring you the news and current affairs that mattel, to you, african story from african perspective, short documentaries, from african filmmakers from zimbabwe. we were pioneers of how economists can change the way with distribute goods. i'd be happy to go into a physical store so dont ivory colds and he's gone. book it fresh farm fishing woods and the shiny africa direct on al jazeera

ah bold. and i'm told stories from asia and the pacific on al jazeera, when the news breaks, families still have oh, and they say they want to leave without getting their relatives out of the problem . when people need to be heard. and the story told my dad and water every way we are left without anything to keep us warm with exclusive interviews and in depth reports on the shelving doors here, a precious style, a thing specimen al jazeera, has t's on the ground to bring you more award winning documentaries and live news ah ah.