solution and as i say most used eastern europe mass disappointingly dull and damp. possibly some snowed it. it's just not feeling quite had the last few days that the suns come back to france and a good part of spain. but that's not true for the north west. expect some snow up on the market here. and it still disappointing me cool. and sherry in morocco, not just the managed to have to say the wind is no stronger hamas, as it was with dust in its flow. and the machine is creeping back into the coast of west africa. ah. 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 india to put on the shelving doors here. precious thought, a faint specimen. g 0 has t's on the ground. if we were award winning documentaries

and live nice. ah, russia says it's suspending the last remaining euclid treaty with united states. the new start deal limits the number of nuclear warheads the to suit house can deploy. so what does this mean? and could it trigger an arms race? 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 arsenal of the world. 2 major nuclear pars harry faltered, explains the history of when you 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 method of integrated successor, new start in 2010. under its terms, russia and united states owners of 90 percent of the world's nuclear weapons would limit their deployed strategic warheads to $1550.00. and the long range missiles and bombers to $700.00 each side could inspect the other sites to ensure compliance up to $800.00 times a year. but inspections will holsted 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, europe, you would keep it and you could get. and now they want to inspect our defense objects in the current condition of confrontation that takes place to day. 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 let the intermediate range nuclear forces treaty in 2019 accusing russia, developing a cruise missile that reached 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 races not existed because of this agreement because of the inspections the backup, 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. saturday. putin emphasized his action was a suspension, not withdrawal, but his rays, 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 at 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 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 robin 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 try me 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 the union and the united states developed during the cold war. i was involved in negotiations was. ready painstakingly detailed and i personally think that'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 exchangers 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. ready cold war where the entire security architecture for strategic stability is gone. and 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 that are going on, right? we'll get into that. not robbie. so each side 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 and 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 atrium, then, you know, both sides had committed to deploying no more than 1515 strategic nuclear warheads, and a maximum of 700 long range missiles and longest. and the good thing is that even though russia has suspended, it has not completely withdrawn from the tv and the stage oblige by their treaty obligations. right. and that's the point, isn't it? dmitri 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 collapsed 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 of that. tromp was doing with a year old lot extension this p t in the beginning of 2021. so it was a relief in law school 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 on wednesday night, which, which could increase the number always walk or keep them operational. russia was tied to money. you know,

we didn't have the resources to produce more warheads and it was pretty costly to, to maintain. then that will, over 1500 agreed in this treaty. so basically it was russia who pushed for. busy more transparency for more reductions and president george bush, that junior was very reluctant 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 a go into details. let's not make any obligation. it was roger who insisted that that should be expection. and that should be a very, or pretty detailed document that miriam, mind your, that the real induction treatise on the 7th if they were to think books, you know, which detailed everything. yeah. so now, now are the point where we're compliance is going to be very hard to monitor dmitri to just briefly, if you would, if we put in

a said that he will state the limits of $1500.00 nuclear weapons. i was just wondering why does that even matter because 1500 nuclear weapons is enough to send us all sky high anyways. well, i think we mentioned that in his speech, little by little, the congress that you gave from the even china. they become an important nuclear powers. i mean, they always had, they are all going to be, but it was in comparable to the nuclear arsenals all the soviet union and denied the states. now it started to change. and obviously in his speech within the system that the of france and britain there, but there should be also included because they revealed themselves to be very cost out the rush in the last 8 years seen. the legal government was almost done by the so lucian in ukraine. so this is the logical and i, i guess. okay,

what about you read what you, what you're thinking about it, what's your think that'd be a preaching 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 15 last country who have come together to address your community with additional defensive anomaly. but 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 age are happening, dismissive or russia security been done. and here i am like sitting in boxes. i'm thinking good. what is this was boxes on the back. yeah, nobody had done the same thing. you know, putting missiles in a lot of 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 there's 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 has done actually been 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 showing. but i think russia definitely is cornered and used as the garden. it's a book in order to not be the one to go down 1st. right. donal jensen, no one is talking about a diplomatic solution rusher is has been pushed into a corner. do you think the west has gone too far in almond ukraine as talk of supplying f sixteens?

well, there's talk about supplying fix teams. however, they're not supplying fixed days. the u. s. has made it quite clear. there are limits to support for ukraine in the sense only that they do not want any attacks on russia. i don't think russia is in a corner. i don't think the us push 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 it will happen. but theoretically, both sides could deploy and developed 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 rush of suspending our participation where there is certainly now an opportunity to rethink the whole concept of player fresh and 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 does appeared to morrow,

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. you're right. you know, perhaps it is for the digital, the new central architecture undergoes division and the top 3 united states, china and russia, now need to sit down and probably be chalk out something. what's nice about this alluded to idea about merging technologies and new, settled 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 lose anything. russia, believe it or not. unity latterly responsible for the breakdown of the control architecture today. it was george bush in 2000. do really naturally the drew from

the end to the listing as a treaty. and then it was president. trump, who you're actually the, drew us from the i n f treaty, and at that time to united states was pointing fingers address and russia blinding thing is that the us, the boats were by leaving the of the treaty. and russia said that if you asking me on drawings, that's where you pull into brown, long 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 beverage. is this about getting president biden to approach russia to start negotiations to try and in the wall? is that what that 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 abm treaty is grabbed by the united states. iron f treat 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 creek is found 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 august

is almost 0, especially after your grand but out over peace negotiation. so last year in march. so russia would like negotiations with the united states when you green, but i don't think in this situation, nuclear arms will be one of their bargaining chips, and that's too important that will be set aside and decide that separately. i hope right what it seems that the nuclear treaties was only this one. the stock treat is, is a bargaining chip, a rubber what? what does a world without a start treaty look like if we come up to for your time and then what is it goes yea to the relations is still 24. and then everybody's, after that we look at an arms race. we already are announced race, like i said, you know, be the magic, the colleges replied bush on existence and the whole list that has been just for the forward we already the word is already and andre situation and countries like

india and pakistan, india and focus on a lot of things to do just change the china and anything that does to modernize it forces, you know, it say that is doing because you china doing it in china. say that there's during, because us is doing it in august 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 assign, 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 in beauty 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 and new on street, the architecture needs to be brought about, which is only going to benefit countries like in dropbox,

it's on north korea and israel dodge, yes, it is interesting, i would like to respond to that, but it's interesting because it wasn't that long ago, was it that president obama was, was talking about, well, power is 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 sceptical framework from within which to work. i would, by the way, disagree with a narrative about the us non compliance. but let's not get to that. the problem

is that we are attorney point as my to counterpart set, 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, but 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 damage your garbage. let's bring it back to the ukraine war, the war and ukraine itself on russia, suspending the treaty 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 asked by racial. so over the government in yeah, let me remind you of that just recently in the sky. he said. busy you was going to recall, kur crimea, and obviously the russian leadership is taking this seriously. you know, what vacation works now? start in increasing the to protected from a possible invasion. let me remind you of that. the crimea has been a part of russia for 8 years. now. there are 2000000 people living there. i will not go into history. it was actually bars in that lead the

18th century soldiers through the states. but of course it would be a tragedy if you great tries to take your bad so that the dog, the responsible dog people like victoria newland about possible strikes against grey me that shoot stop. and that would ease the situation in gordon, of course possible use some destructive weapons, not necessarily weapons of mass destruction, but just when the old 27 countries or the european union and also got there's a need to talk about the need over after the feed and when they found weapons or was that makes people in moscow, nervous and angry and the situation should be going. i think this is what more school wants and what you should want. if you even care about that about,

it's kind of rubbing 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 in as time goes on. if, 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 builders, to be a battery, and at once. and it keeps making references to a global word order, which is it was based on not only the said, the u. s. wants the rest of the world to follow, but in which russia and china also have a faith. and this strategic composition of that us is involved in the district to china on one hand in the just rush young and does not serve the others because

it all the things that us is doing to modernize its forces. both nuclear and conventional you are, you must have seen the nuclear posture reviews that have come out in 20182022 are escalade already and offensive in nature. it dos they talk about making smaller, usable, new laws yield in nature, which means that they are back to the use of l. so the world is changing due to us distraction with more emerging technologies and more set of new re added onto it. but no arms controls talk happening and either so if there's a dangerous time for all of us to think about it, it's too busy going, 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. and also the 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 that rose bass international order, the build up 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 forces. 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 ukraine. of course, we're back to the, the russian narrative, which is simply wrong. crimea is not part of russia. it'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 try to justify unsuccessfully with various rationale, is that nobody, nobody really 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 pollution and today by russian officials that they are not going to go ahead and violate to start limits quickly or ref regarding 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 us 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 meet you. barbara's

thanks so much for this important illuminating discussion and thank you for 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 at a j inside story, for maintenance, clerk and the whole team here. it's good bye for now. ah and reporting the field means i also get to witness not just news as it's breaking but

also history as it's unfolding, drove me from serbia hungry to rep one day. i might be covering politics and we're actually i might be covering photos. but what's most important to me is talking to people, understanding what they're going through so that i can convey the headlines in the most human way possible. here at al jazeera, we believe everyone has a story worth hearing. rushes more in ukraine has dominated. well, he's for the past 12 months, devastating to those in the line of fire, or directly impact. it has strengthened global alliances and deacons divisions with far reaching effects on the lives of millions of people worldwide. in a week heard special coverage al jazeera explored every aspect of the conflict, the human, the political, and the economic,

and the possibilities of resolution. ukraine war, one here on, on out there. how do you state control information? how did the narrative influence public opinion? how is this is in journalism, we flaming the story for listening post dissects the media. we don't cover the news . we cover the way the news is cover. tough times the man tough question. what exactly are you asking for you? what the troops on the ground, the rigorous debate we challenge conventional wisdom res. i'm is so deeply entrenched in the country that it's identify with america itself. when you challenge racism, it looks as if you're challenging almera and demand the truth. there's no serious discussion about this because it goes to the very root of who we are up front with me. mark lamb on hill on al jazeera.