haven't seen that for a while. it doesn't change very much on friday either. that or drop graph chris generally fine and dry becomes size and is rather more active. this is tropical cyclone freddy, which during thursday will build up to its 2nd surge in strength. it's not huge when 210 kennedy's route are not that great as movie fairly quickly westwards. but it's heading towards the low latent coast of mozambique, which is where it's like to make contact during friday. once it's in mozambique, it's hanging around for 2 or 3 days. there will be a lot of flooding. ah, the scale of the disruption when you see it. my air is shocking. more than 70 percent of the buildings in this town have been totally destroy tons and tons and tons of thousands of people homeless across this region. every average turns into it mom and i do, sir. my mason no, don't even have temporary shelters. many of my friends that may have loved and

hopes of future together are now gone. ah, russia says it suspending the last remaining euclid treaty with united states. the new start deal limits the number of nuclear warheads the to suit house plan deploy . so what does this mean? and could it trigger and arms right? this is inside stored. ah oh, very welcome to the program. i'm nick clock, not russian president vladimir putin says his country is suspending its role in the new strategic arms reduction treaty or start. he made the announcement on tuesday, had a speech ahead of the 1st anniversary of the start of the war in ukraine. now start limits the strategic nuclear arms arsenals of both russia and the united states.

putin said russia was not completely withdrawing from the treaty, but it is due to lapse in 2026 and that will remove the last constraint on the arsenals of the world. 2 major nuclear pars, harry faltered, explains the history of the new start. the strategic arms reduction treaty 1st signed by president bush and gorbachev in 1990. 1 has been part of a nuclear weapons framework in some form, ever since barack obama and dmitri met with inaugurated successor new start in 2010 . under its terms, russia and united states owners of 90 percent of the world's nuclear weapons would limit the deployed strategic warheads to $1550.00. and the long range missiles and bummers to $700.00 each side could inspect the other sites to ensure compliance up to $800.00 times a year. but inspections were hosted 1st by code 19 and then by deteriorating relations since brushes invasion of ukraine. on tuesday in moscow,

vladimir putin announced russia was suspending its membership. he said in response to hostile us action with europe, you would keep it and you can't get it. and now they want to inspect our defense objects in the current condition of confrontation that takes place today. it sounds like nonsense us russia relations on nuclear weapons have been strained for years. the united states pulled out of the anti ballistic missile treaty in 2002, and left the intermediate range nuclear forces treaty in 2019 accusing rusher of developing a cruise missile that breached its terms. experts fear a breakdown of the architecture that for decades has rained in nuclear arsenals. we seem to be losing the last bilateral relationship governing nuclear weapons. so we could have an arms race after this, and that price is not existed because of this agreement because of the inspections that back up the intelligence both states have. and so you have one of those pillows being taken away. joe biden agreed

a 5 year extension to new start when he took office in 2021. started me. putin emphasized his action was a suspension, not withdrawal, but has raised the prospect of a treaty lapsing in 2026. he also said he had put new nuclear systems on combat duty and pledge to resume nuclear testing if the united states did the same. hurry, faucet al jazeera. ah, for more of this now joined by guests in alexandra virginia is donell, jensen, russia, the director at the us institute of peace. he's also a former us diplomat in moscow and a former soviet weapons inspector. impacts done in the hall is robbie actor, a director of the center for security strategy and policy research at the university of the whole. and revenue specializes in nuclear security in deterrence . and finally in moscow is dimitri bobbitt choose a political commentator for,

for us yet. so you've got new news agency owned and operated by the russian government. welcome to you all. good to have you here for this important discussion . and donald, i like to talk with you 1st. if i may, before we get into what all this means and what the implications are, can we 1st just try and understand how important the treaty is? what function it has had and how it has been keeping things in check? well, 1st of all, it's as both important as a tactical agreement. it's important as a political agreement. it's the last main pillar of the very important security architecture that russia to show that union and the united states developed during the cold war. i was involved in negotiations, it was painstakingly detailed and i personally think that it's very important that this treaty remain in place. but however, it depends on trust. and when that trust involves allowing onside inspections that

trust allows that trust involves data exchanges matters like that. so while president reagan said, trust but verify, you can verify only with technical exchanges and on site inspection. so if this treating goes or a shake then or is weakened, then i think we're in a way back to early cold war where the entire security architecture for strategic stability is gone. this is a very, very important thing. both sides, i think need to be careful both sides. i think at the end of the day want a renewal or adaptation. but to some extent it's caught up and the tension between the 2 countries. ok, that are going on. right. we'll get into that. not robbie. so each site could inspect each other's sites, so that enabled and prevented things from spiraling. and now i guess it's harder to monitor the compliance and that's the issue. is it?

yes. so under this, a present in verification and the inspection of each of the size was very important part of it. and now what basically the u. s. gets to lose in all of this is to the national technical means on ground inspections. and then they will not know as to what's going on the various developments that russia planning going to head, but also under this acreage. and, you know, both sides had committed to deploying no more than 1515 to d, j nuclear warheads, and a maximum of 700 long range, missiles and bombs. and the good thing is that even though russia had suspended, it has not completely withdrawn from the tv and the state obliged by or t t. all right, and that's the point, isn't it? dimitri babich at because they haven't pulled out, they have suspended,

but potentially we got this whole renewal process coming up in 4 years time. if relations do not improve, we could have a situation where the whole international arms control regime has as all but collapse because we've already had other agreements that have gone in the trump era . you are absolutely right about the extension in 4 years. let me remind you that the trump was doing with a year or not extension this p t in the beginning of 2021. so it was a relief in moscow where the president, by the extended however, also let me remind you that initially it was russia who insisted on this limit to the number of warheads. because i'm like the nice guy which could increase the number always walk or keep them operational

a russia was di, money, you know. busy we didn't have the resources to produce more warheads and it was pretty costly to, to maintain. then that will, over 1500 agreed to this treaty. so basically it was russia who pushed for. busy more. busy transparency for more reductions and president bush junior was ready to walk them initially to make it the detail of the agreement. he just said, if you remember where the. busy game is the cold water, so that's not go into details. it's not making your vacation. it was roger who insisted that that should be expection. and that should be a very or pretty detailed document that miriam, i know that the re induction read to solve the 7th. if they were to think books, you know, which detailed everything. yeah. okay. so now, now we're at the point where we're complying, is going to be very hard to monitor dmitri to just briefly, if you would,

if we have been put in a said that he will state the limits of 1500 nuclear weapons. i'm just wondering why does that even matter? because 1500 nuclear weapons is enough to send this old sky high anyways that well, i think you mentioned that in his speech, little by little, the con kids from the u. k. frogs and even china. they become an important nuclear power. i mean they always had. busy their own k b, but it was in comparable to the nuclear arsenals on the soviet union and denied the states. now it started to change and obviously his speech would and insisted that france and britain there. but that should be also included because they revealed themselves to be very hostile to russia in the last 8 years since the legal government was austin by the so called revolution in ukraine. so this is the

logical can i, i guess. okay, so what about you read what you, what you're thinking about it, what's your think that'd be preaching the motivation behind this? he's been boxed into a corner, so he's laying out his card. so i believe that, you know, there are 50 plus country, you come together to address your community with additional air defenses and he goes and now the banks are being added, but which one of them is talking about a diplomatic solution? none of them, you know, so all of these countries laid by the u. s. and they have been dismissive of russia security been done. and here i am like sitting in boxes. i'm thinking good. what is this was back? yeah. then obama done the same thing. you know, putting misers in giving umbrella, to what would have happened. so russia definitely threatened and pushed into a corner. and this is just spilling. this is just telling united states that if

any city in us was risking, you know, so i think it is a dime to convince me it says fontose, russia signaling. and the reason that they're not withdrawing and just using suspension is also buying time. they're doing. i should be testing us as done. i should be in testing and both of them i just, you know, trying to finish as a signal that we are going to be ready to do that. but it is part of broader signaling to each other and partially, but i think russia definitely is cornered and used as the garden it's playbook in order to not be the one to go down 1st. right. donal jensen, no one is talking about a different magic solution rusher is, has been pushed into a corner. do you think the west has gone too far in ami ukraine as talk of

supplying f sixteens? well, there's talk about supplying our fix teams. however, they're not supplying after 6 days the u. s. has made it quite clear. there are limits to support for ukraine in this sense, only that they do not want any tax on russia. i don't think russia is in a corner. i don't think the u. s. has pushed too far, i think that this is actually a, basically a unifying western response to a war, russian invasion of ukraine, which is a violation of international law. but if i could go back to, i believe, demetrius point, i think that it's a key moment for start architecture, for a number of reasons. number one is the fact that theoretically, i don't think that will happen. but theoretically, both sides could deploy and develop more strategic nuclear weapons. however, as dmitri shad, the chinese, in particular, appear to be building up their nuclear forces. the start training does not take

that into account at all. so any revise training probably would be best served by having the chinese as participants so far they're not that interested. the 2nd phenomenon would be the development of new weapon systems. the ability of conventional weapons to inflict massive destruction is higher than ever before. their space weapons, cyber. there are a hyper velocity weapons with the kremlin, is bragged about which are not nuclear necessarily. all those new systems are coming online at a time when start is under attack. so both sides all sides have to think through the strategic calculus right now. it's a good time for it. and it's unfortunate that the war has gotten where we saw yesterday with the russians are spending their participation, where there is certainly not an opportunity to rethink the whole concepts of sarah nonproliferation at the john bolton, who served as national security advisor during the trump administration. he said that he, you, you start as

a bad deal disney and said that if it appeared to murray wouldn't trouble me at all . and he pointed to what you just mentioned that china should be the main concern. and they should be brought into the fold and possibly we should bring, you know, others into the fold as well at that point in time, robbie: and maybe india as well here. right? you know, perhaps it is for the job. the new care on central architecture undergoes division and the top 3 united see china and russia now need to sit down and probably be chalk out something. what's not going to value this alluded to about merging technologies and new settle back and reach that is coming into play. there is no strategic control to address those. so i guess the diners opportune right now and yes, nobody has to use anything. russia believe is not unity latterly responsible for the breakdown of the control architecture today. it was george bush in 2000,

200 and actually the drew from the end to the listing of the treaty. and then it was president, trump, we're actually the drew us from the i n f treaty. and at that time to united states was wanting thing is address and russia. blinding thing is that the u. s. the boats were violating the treaty. and russia said that if us can meet on drones, that's very willing to ground on food group and why should they adhered to the treaty installation daily. so i think that this new emerging technologies, a new weapon systems, new architecture needs to come in place. and this is the right time for that dimitry babich, is this about getting president biden to approach russia to start negotiations to try and in the wall? is that what they put is trying to do is, is that how he's playing his cards? i think nuclear weapons to important issue by itself. you know

however, i agree with that though, of course it was no fortune who destroyed the system. a launch control, she rightly mentioned a, b, m, p t s grabbed by the united states iron f creek is grabbed by the united states. let me also remind you, all of the conventional forces in europe. treat dollars is right and conventional weapons are becoming very destructive and unfortunately it was the west that just refused to review this treaty. according to the old peak is signed in 1992, a walk into stone. you are still on the soviet control ration control of russia was the right to require the review of the treaty, which is now dead. actually however, i agree with you that the, of course rash will do some kind of negotiation on your brain with the united states. because. busy the ukrainian government on the mr. lansky look,

they have been unable to produce any tangible agreements. the trust between ours is almost 0, especially after your grand but out of the single asian. so last year in march. so russia would like negotiations with the united states, one your green, but i don't think it's nuclear arms will be one of their bargaining chips. and that's too important that will be set aside and decided separately. i hope right what it seems that you can treat. it was only this one. the start treat is, is a bargaining chip a rubber. what, what does a world without a start treaty? like if we come up to for your time and then one isn't negotiated, the relations are still to 4. and then everybody's after that we look at an arms race be already are in announce rate, like i said, you know, with emerging technologies on existence and the whole list that has been just for

the forward we already, the word is already and andre situation in countries like india and pakistan, india and focus on a quater thing has to be just jane with china and anything that india does to modernize its forces. you know, i'd say that is doing because you, china doing it in china, say that there's during, because us is doing it and focus on being a history teacher at the end of the strategic chain is, is suffering because of the new care that's being spiraling out of control, so i don't think so in 40 a time. if you don't have new shars or something that your life or both countries getting back together, you have much to lose the architecture, the order that was in place. that was the board included of arms control during the whole, large, long, dead, and gone. it is sign that if the strategic competition between united states, china and russia, needs to be settled anew on street based architecture needs to be brought about,

which is only going to benefit factories like in dropbox. it's done last fauria and go just it's interesting that i would like to respond to that issue because it wasn't that long ago, was it that president obama was, was talking about, well, power working towards a world without nuclear weapons at all. it shows how quickly things can collapse. that was always sort of an idea listed and unrealistic aspirations. you remember back in the eighty's gorbachev and reagan talked about the same thing. so i have that we have to be realistic. and one of the things you have to really be realistic about are the categories, the weapons levels that this treaty has. these weapons are expensive, they take many years to get online and 50570804 launchers. is i'm sceptical framework from within which to work i would by the way, disagree with a narrative about us noncompliance. but let's not get to that. the problem

is that we are to attorney point as my to counterpart said, and we need to be very serious about where we go, where we go next. one of the interesting dramas we've seen is that some people have tried to keep the strategic discussion away from the war and re ukraine. i think that personally, i think that would be useful, but we've not been able to completely do that. and as we saw yesterday, both crises are now law tied together. we need to separate those and make progress on strategic arms. stability, not reduction, necessarily much stability as best we can going forward now. and that's why the, that 2 or 3 years we have left after the start extension is very, very important. why do we want, what are the russians want? what's the chinese want? how can we create a balance? and all these nuclear powers taking into account new systems. that's a key strategic challenge that takes time. and i'm worried that we're running out

of time to meet your garbage. let's bring it back to the ukraine war, the war and ukraine itself on russia. suspending the treat you in russia's foreign minister says the united states must make a conscientious effort to de escalate and create conditions for full functioning of the treaty. what does that mean? leave ukraine alone? oh, no. just to limit at least limit aspirations. so over the government in yeah, let me remind you that just recently in the sky, he said that you was going to recall the crimea. and obviously the russian leadership is taking this seriously. you know what the geisha works now start in increasing the ad to protected from a possible invasion. let me remind you that crimea has been a part of russia for 8 years now, or to 1000000 people living there. i will not go into history. it was over there

actually in that lead the 18th century soldiers through the states. but of course it would be a tragedy if you green tries to take grania bad, so that the dog, the responsible dog people like victoria newland about possible strikes against the graeme. yeah, that should stop and that would ease the situation in good. and of course, most people use some destructive weapons, not necessarily a weapons of mass destruction, but just when the old 27 countries. busy of the european union and also got there's a need to talk about the need or brushing the feed on when the sound was. of course that makes people in moscow, nervous and angry and the situation should be going. i think this is what was cool once and what you should want if it cared about. what did that

involve? it's kind of rubia. how much of a tight rope do you think the world is walking right now? because of this and, and the corner the vladimir putin finds himself and may well find himself. and as time goes on, if things go against the russian offences, i think there's a dangerous time, not only for the world, but specifically for the region itself. all russia wants, i believe, is to maintain global strategic parity. and it once, and it keeps making references to a global world or the which is it was based on not only the rules that the u. s. wants the rest of the world to follow, but in which russia and china also have a faith. and this strategic combination of that us is involved in the district to china. on one hand in the just rush young does not serve the others because

it, all of the things that us is doing to modernize its forces. both nuclear and conventional . you must have seen the nuclear posture to use that have come out in 20182022. our escalade already and offensive in nature. it dog, they talk about making this in smaller, usable, new laws yield in nature, which means that they are back to be usable. so the world is engine due to us destruction. with more emerging technologies and more set of new re added onto it said no control talk happening any there. so if there's a dangerous time for all of us to think about it, it's too busy going in, you know, digital age and hypersonic age in the age of a guy is going to be sustainable and coming to the diligence and you'd like to respond to that a real point of view is the well, that

a less safe place right now. i believe, yes, the world is a less safe place, but to some extent, that's also their fault of china and russia. china and russia are directly challenging roles base to international order. the build up of strategic nuclear forces, for example, by the chinese has gone on for 20 years. the, the report that my counterpart talked about is really a relatively late us response to modernization of both the russian and chinese nuclear courses. i think it is a dangerous time. i think it's everybody should start thinking about how to manage these very serious challenges that the 3 of us are talking about today. and i think there are away ways to do that on your train. of course, we're back to the, the russian narrative, which is simply wrong. crimea is not part of russia. that's not part of russia by international law. and russia, for example, in the ninety's was

a part of the budapest memorandum which guaranteed ukraine security. what we have, however, is a brutal, violent war against a demo democracy, frankly, which are russia, tried to justify, unsuccessfully with the various rationale that nobody, nobody rarely believes. so, as i said, as my partners who said it's a dangerous moment, is it more dangerous today? and yesterday, probably asked, but i think the very interesting comments from poach and, and today by russian officials that they are not going to go ahead and violate to start limits quickly or with regard to if they're testing, show that both russia and i think the united states wants to move forward with a follow on start, either as a revision to the current agreement, or as a new agreement, taking into account the factors and all of it talked about here this morning. all right, donald, thanks for that diligence and everybody thanks very much indeed. we've run out of

time to appreciate your time. don't jensen. i really like to dimitry beverage. thanks so much for this important illuminating discussion. and if you take the watching, you can see the program again at any time by visiting our website, al jazeera dot com, and for further discussion, go to our facebook page. that's a facebook dot com forward slash ha, inside story. you can of course, also join the conversation on twitter. i'll handle it's at a j inside story from 8 o'clock and the whole team here is good bye for now. ah, ah. women ron micro businesses are key to center goals development and to improved food

security. access to finance helps them succeed since 2014 nearly a 180 micro enterprises. collectives and small businesses across synagogue received concession re financing. these loans were made possible by an initiative administered by the key right. good. will fund the q 8 fund partners in development? tough times the man tough questions. what exactly are you asking for you? what troops on the ground, the rigorous debate we challenge conventional wisdom and demand the truth up front with me. mark them on hill on al jazeera. i've worked out their english since it's lordship, as a principal presenter and as a correspondence with any breaking the story we want to hear from those people who would normally not get that voices heard on an international news channels. one moment i'll be very proud of was when we covered the napoleon quake of 2050,

a terrible natural disaster on the story that needs to be told from the hall of the affected area to be then to tell the people story was very important at the time for the past year, al jazeera, his correspondence have reported on every aspect of the far reaching consequences of russia's invasion of ukraine, upset by street fighting the destruction of townsend and the lives of records. from the political maneuvering and global repercussions. the devastating impact on the lives of ordinary people from both sides of the front line. the bomb shelters the seats of power and the reality of the ground from moscow, cave brush and could fill dunbar and beyond will continue to deliver in depth, unbiased personal reporting. so you get the full story when i was 0 ah.