tackled the crisis from breakers, but critics say it's purely administrative and will do little to help. and humans to, for electricity's being appointed alongside the already existing minister for energy . listen, skeptic say it will only cause further confusion. meanwhile, the power utility, c. e. o is resigned at you. investigative journalist cow cohen has written extensively about what he calls the sabotage of a scam, this physical sabotage, and this sabotage on the border. people are physically breaking down power stations cutting down pylons, adding rocks into coal, trying to cause past issues to breakdown either to secure contracts or because of ideological motivations in the boardroom. the or a series of incidents, you know, trying to target the executive of risk. i'm trying to make them look bad. some say there's a lack of political well to end the power cuts. meanwhile, businesses like jolt, struggle to keep running, while thousands of other small businesses have already shut their doors for me to mila al jazeera johannesburg.

ah! hello again. this is al jazeera and these are the headlines, and palestinian man has been killed and some palestinian homes, torched, and another day of violence and he occupied westbank. the latest clara happened in the town of horror and followed the killing of 2 israeli settlers israeli forces. they are searching for palestinian suspects. dismal troops have been deployed and security checks of and stepped up earlier on sunday. officials from israel and the palestinian authority held talks and jordan and had agreed to deescalate tensions. sorry, heritage is in west harrison. a statement was released from this meeting where they said they have agreed to de escalate tensions. they also agreed to maintain the status quo oxer must compound over the ramadan will be coming up very soon and narrow concerns that things could escalate within that area. but since not

statement husband release and just in the last hour, these rarely prime minister benjamin netanyahu sweets and saying that settlements won't be frozen, which seems to be contradicting to the statement that was released from that meeting that just happened in jordan a few hours ago. at least $59.00 migrants have die the ship wreck off the coast of southern italy. they include 12 children. officials say the boat traveled to italy from to kia and those on board were trying to reach europe through the mediterranean. more than a few migrants that have been rescued in nigeria balance being counted after saturday's presidential and parliamentary elections. the tightest in decades. some areas in one province extended voting through sunday. after delays. thousands of gathered in cities across the mexico to protest against the government's plans to cut the budget of the elections watchdog, according to say, the changes threatened democracy and accusation that the president under the manual lopez burdue denies. of those the headlines. i'll be back with more after upfront

to stay with us here on al jazeera. this is the right here to report on the people often ignored, but who must be heard. how many other channels can you say? we'll take the time and put extensive thought into reporting from under reported areas. of course we cover major global events that are passionate lives and making sure that you're hearing the stories from people in places like how is fine libya, yemen ha ha, ha, region. and so many other we go to them, you make the effort. we care who state in 1971, a military analyst by the name of daniel ellsberg leaked to the press. a 7000 page top secret pentagon study and covering years of official lies about u. s. military involvement in the vietnam war. the leak documents known as the pentagon papers were instrumental in exposing the scope and strategy behind the u. s. war in the region. and many at the time believed that they could change how the

world viewed war decades later as conflicts rage on and ukraine, you have been and ethiopia, just the name of few. the decision making process behind wars remains as murky. is that what we do know is that billions of dollars are spent on weapons and defense contracts every year, making conflict incredibly profitable results. so will benefit from ward. and who are the biggest players behind the war machine and up front special with daniel ellsberg. ah, daniel ellsberg, thank you so much for joining me on up front. thank you for having a large part of your life's work has been committed to not only raising awareness about the dangers of nuclear weapons, but also the money behind them. in 2020 is the pandemic raged the 9 nuclear weapons . states collectively spent an estimated $72000000000.00 on nuclear weapons. and we're now living in a time when the danger of nuclear war, of course has spiked. where does this leave?

the movement for nuclear disarmament given how much money is at play and all of this, what was kept us from having any real effect on reducing the danger loopy war all these years. i'm over was quite effective in helping stock a above ground testing and then even the underground testing eventually. but in other respects i, it really hasn't been very effective. and i don't think the movement was as conscious as it should be of the money behind judging the effect that had on congress. they really acted as so. it was just a question, what people watch which was tool void nuclear war, or rob, ah, just political, strategic aspects of it is not needed. it's dangerous and so forth. but it came very little attention to the role of companies like allowing lockheed raytheon, general dynamics. and just the as if far they really weren't effective. it's like

talking about climate without talking about the exxon corporation or shell or chevron. and actually that is the weight climate is talked about pretty much. we just don't fish fact that we are facing a large flows of money directed at keeping the status quo, which is the status quo of extreme nuclear danger, especially in times of crisis like this and of climate movement toward an abyss. basically, the end of our current civilization, or creech, we shuffling with people around the world in talk about the threat of nuclear war in this abyss that we're headed toward. and that's certainly a piece of another piece of it. is war in armed conflict that's taking place right now is plaguing multiple countries. you can get ukraine, you got yemen, you got the malia, you got the ethiopia list, goes on, but behind wars like that are a weapons industry that you just alluded to. that was worth $531000000000.00

worldwide in 2020. and as of this recording, while the basin of ukraine intensifies, the stock price is general dynamics, lockheed martin. as you mentioned, northrop grumman, arethia, and they recently hit their 5 year hive. so as we talk about war, we also have who benefits from war? can you help me unpack that a little bit? who's really benefited? is the old earth, latin silken coolly bono, who benefits? going all the way back when you can name was just going the last century world war one. the loans by j. p. morgan to the british for arms, for the british, it had to deal or even had lost the war to some extent. j. p. morgan would have gone bankrupt and wilson, i'm president and could not allow that to happen. that would have been a financial disaster, and that goes on from there on, in particular, whoa, whoa, who benefited from vietnam going on as long as it did?

or if kind of stand right now, the war that we're supporting in yemen through arms to saudi arabia and the u. e is keeping it truly genocidal. war going on are enormous massacre. and i think with very little benefit except to the arms manufacturers. people ask, why don't we learn from our failures in vietnam and afghanistan and elsewhere? and the answer is, who has a listen to learn? those wars were very profitable for the people you name for lockheed raytheon knows will come in and the others are. they have anything to learn. i'm afraid that right now, there's 2 major purposes that will keep the war that can keep the war and ukraine going. as long as the war in afghanistan, not in the way that is being waged now. but by a kind of guerrilla, we're that we're supporting that we support, as we did against the soviets in afghanistan for 10 years. and the f ukrainian

people would be ground to bits in the course of that as the afghans were. and yet it's very comfortable for people who are supplying those weapons and keep going. there is one other major motives that affects these things in particular in europe . and that is that r u. s. role in europe who are not after all, a european nation. and we have no particular rule in a european union, but in nato, that's as the mafia says, cosa nostra our thing. we control natal pretty much. and nato gives us an excuse and a reason to sell enormous amounts of arms to now to the formerly warsaw pact, nations which had only 2nd raid or obviously soviet weapons altogether. from the moment that the berlin wall came down, lockheed representatives were in warsaw showing them on a need for f,

20 tunes. and for other weapons right there. against who, as the russians are reasonably asked, actually, russia is an indispensable enemy in europe. and nothing else can rancho, it's the same level enemy that, that, that's, that fascinating language. break that down for me, the, an indispensable. and what does that mean? it means that you can't really justify new trident submarines or i, she be m's that northrop grumman is making a whole new life she be up against ian or isis, or i, al, kato, ah, nature stonecutters as rationale for multi 1000000000 now dollar arms budget. only russia has the targets, any sophisticated arms to fight against. you don't need advance 5th generation fighters against people who don't have any aircraft or fighters of their own, or sophisticated ones. but russia and now china and for the future in particular,

to offer noxious arrival or a competitor, but shown who could be painted as an enemy against whom you have to defend. and of course, put now in the last shoe once has just been a bonanza for the armed people. because last you've made a russia look an offensive, oh enemy of some kind. who has to be defended against with the latest weapons, with new weapons. and of course, russia has its military industrial complex to maintenance fast. they remind me of the black arts poet, gills got herons that everybody loves peace. the problem is you can't make no money off of it. you know, in the past few months, more than 5600000000 dollars has been poured into ukraine in the form of military aid from the u. s. from the u. k. and from the e. u. we seen similar situations in the past when u. s. arms were used by libyan in syrian opposition groups. but what happens when

those conflicts are over or seemingly over? oh, where does the weapons go? iraq church, it's a long time before these contracts are over. as you know, in afghan, a santa went on for 20 years, and it could good much longer. in libya, what we did was supply a lot of weapons to people who in turn. so some 2 other insurgencies of the and terrors groups and others throughout africa. and elsewhere, and of course, our efforts in afghanistan armed in effect against the soviets isis, or i'll should say al cater and then later isis. so he things have low back effects . ah, heaping in my a didn't these amps industry. so it would be wrong to say they didn't invade ukraine. cooking did that. however, they, in their people, they were influencing and the government were willing to risk

a war like this coming from their policies which were attract provocative in terms of making it likely that the russians, any russian leader would eventually react against it. however illegally. just as we reacted when khrushchev put missiles in cuba, jewish retires, and those missiles did not, in fact, threaten our security. and i say that as someone who was looking at precisely a problem in the pentagon, at that time working for his mcnamara said, hey, it's not a security problem, missiles into what? it's a political problem. critical, good. i want to know this is somewhat at this stage, foreseeable, right? i mean after thing, what happens in syria with thing? what happens in libby or we, as you've done, we could go back decade prior. the weapons end up in the hands of folk who as physically we wouldn't want to have them. and yet we continue either to fund them directly or by proxy. so i guess the question for me is,

why do we allow it to happen in ultimately? what happens to these weapons? what kind of considerations given to what happens to these weapon? well, it comes down to who the we is that we're talking about. i, it's not just, it's not a century, the taxpayers or the citizens who are, by the way, regrettably willing to, she had deaths of others who don't look like us. ukraine is getting wexler concern about the casualties in the war crimes. because it is not a brown muslims that are being victimized. sure. but by the russians in this case. but it's white christians and that they're like us and to see them in such anguish, inter that creates a public pressure that i wasn't here before. but in all of these other cases, as i should, oh, what's the problem? we hear that matters. the ones that provide the large campaign contributions and they provide the personnel at higher levels and these ranks benefit fine from them

. there's no problem. i may not be very successful, but he failing war is just as profitable as a winning one. in fact, in someplace better cause it goes on forever. as you say, the winning is over tree with when you say the libby is it is the prime example. i where and you could say to some extent, afghanistan, where the weapons fanned out to other people had provided opponents to an adversaries. but is that bad? multiple adversaries are also good for the military industrial complex, not only in our country and in europe as well. it's not only americans who sold these weapons, though it is mainly these oversee the french, the others. and the russians have big arms markets in the world. according to the institute for policy studies last year,

the average american taxpayer gave about $2000.00 to the military with over $900.00 going to corporate military contractors. in contrast, the average taxpayer contributed about $27.00 to the centers for disease control, prevention and barely $5.00 to renewable energy. how do you advocate for peace when so much taxpayer money is going to will call it the fits republicans in particular, are very resistant. to spending on social welfare or of any kind for people or anything that in any way seems to compete with private industry. the one thing you can get republicans to budget money for is allegedly national security. even though almost none of these weapons actually add or even

relevant to our national security, but they are relevant to making threats against russian. you need russia later, china will be a good enough militarily to serve that purpose of the necessary, the indispensable enemy. but now it was hard to keep the cold. we're going fully at full speed with russia as an enemy in the ninety's and the early part of the century. so now it's back and was back before the attack on russia, but now kootenai has fit into that in a way that i think was not unwelcome to our military industry. if they didn't actually wanted, i'm sure they could even count on russia actually invading another country, but to have russia objecting and complaining and posing and threatening to invade, as he did a whole year ago with, with, with troops on the edge of ukraine and embarrass all that was good for

business and it doesn't, by the way, it doesn't justify putin's aggression at all. he's did to have reason to feel in the longer run, threatened russian security in terms of weapons so close to their borders, like the weapons in cuba. that we objected to. kennedy had no rigid reason for threatening to adventure on that. and russia has had no legitimate recently for grading craig, but time. nevertheless, we've pursued a policy that was warmed against, going back to the mid ninety's by george can another see founder of the cold war and trust which, who should issue an indescribable error blunder mistake or to make an enemy of russia by moving especially into ukraine of some of the u. s. as top spies and military generals with ties of defense contractors end up as

intelligence analysts on various news channels when they retire. for example, former c, i a director john brennan became embassies senior national security and intelligence analysts se, se, connecticut with what you want to say. and former c i a director michael hayden became a national security analyst for c and n a. how much does this compromise what the public is told about war? what else? what that stake? well, it depends what you think the purpose of functions that really is in times of war, in our military society. their function pretty much is to sell the public on the need for more weapons and the need to intervene in this country. our media is ultimately controlled by major corporations like general electric ah, for a long time. and joe, many other conglomerates basically. and michelle's recognize her consist of big business. and as i say, laurie's good business for the media and joe,

for the administration, even when it's failing. so hoof sure. i'm answering your question. it's natural for them to hire these people if their message is to get propaganda out, who better to do it than these military or the she a people, if you want, endless war, which in effect, the wish has wanted. so this, so then what happens, right? what happens when citizens are only told the truth about war? ah, after the wars are over, after that, if maces leaked after information is declassified, it seems like we only get this under extreme and unforeseeable circumstances and the people were trying to conceal it. so what does that mean for? well, the kind of information that we needed to blood vietnam was represented by such as the pentagon papers, which was a study of vietnam decision making from 45 to 6768.

i put that out 1st starting in 69 and then through the newspapers and 71. so that was somewhat belated, but not too long. but i put on trial for a possible 115 years in prison. so down quite a few people, i didn't see any other bigger. it's like a for 39 years until chelsea manning put out hundreds of thousands of files on his canister. and in iraq. and she spent 7 and a half years in prison. ed snowden, for his revelations, essential revelations of criminality. why the national security agency, the universal surveillance, not only in our country but around the world, but where it wasn't so illegal, but definitely in some constitution in america. and so essentially a lifetime exile. so these people and daniel hale revealed the drone program or

they did what they should have done just as i think i did what i should have done. but everyone has paid a penalty. very heavy penalty nodded my chase nixon actually committed so many crimes which happened amazingly, almost miraculously to become revealed towards the end of my trial that kept me from having to go to prison as he had intended with the others and say either exile or prison and that is purchased you mentioned its healthy man and he of course leaked information through wiki leaks. and now it looks like wiggling found drilling a size is being extradited to the united states. and weekly, published, of course classified information including document exposing us war crimes in iraq and afghanistan. and publishers were integral to the information that you liked about the vietnam war. so i'm curious from your perspective, what happens if that president that you spoke to is said that allows governments to

dictate what can and can't be published? well, if i may clue this way, it threatens to create a new, as chris is not distinguishable from luscious to day with julian, a sorry sh ah extradited. if he hasn't yet been expedited, but it was expedited and prosecuted, convicted here. we will have heard the 1st instance of an actual journalist i hadn't been in prison for putting out the truth. i was the 1st source, former official ah, to give information like that to jerry was and i was put on trial for but no journalist is here. we're going put on trout. thanks to our 1st amendment. freedom of the press and treatment speech, which most countries don't have as the law or a, it will be essentially rescinded if julian sanchez, successfully prosecuted. and we will then approach the state control of information

such as we're seeing in russia today. all of these cases, of course, demonstrate the importance of exposing the truth about what's happening when it comes to war in other matters. and of course, your leaking of the pentagon papers is a prime example of that. but to day we have an expansion arise even of this information and it's hard to decipher what's true, what's not, what's fact, what's fiction, how important is it to have actual transparency when it comes to government actions and government decisions about war? i'm afraid that transparency and war are 2 words. don't really go to each other. they don't exist together in war time, the secrecy that the government carries on all the time about his own crimes and lies in misleading statements in bad predictions. reckless actions,

that secrecy is certainly legitimize in war because you have to keep it from an enemy. that's one of the senses in which i said enemies are indispensable, especially as a long term once in a, in a cold war. we have to keep things from russians altogether. so you don't, you don't pick transparency. and when people do come out, there's 2 native it, they do get prosecutor, when it's coming out of the sick. part of it, which is very dismaying, is nothing much happens. it may affect public opinion to some extent, good public, the thing doesn't try policy or whether a war can be ended or not. i hoped it would. in fact, in my case, nixon was so concerned that i might put out his secrets, which i did have, but i didn't have documents to prove it. but he thought i had documents in to shut me up. he did domestic crimes against an american me,

which actually figured far more politically in the millions of other people we were killing in vietnam. but a crime against an american counted more. unfortunately, when these things have come out, i have to say not much has changed. so there's a problem with the audience, with the citizenry you could say with our species. and i actually, i do say that our willingness to support unquestioningly a leader, especially when he or occasionally she can point to somebody threatening here, security and she us to set down public information about it in order to people go along with it pretty well. and when they find out it, not too many of our own soldiers are getting killed as in kansas, then they let it go on indefinitely. as chance them was 20 years. ukraine. i think

if it, if it devolved down, if the russians came in, war didn't get out, which i don't expect them to, to wish and others will be supporting a guerrilla war, which could be his cost, true to the ukrainians. as the guerrilla war, that the movie dean put up that we supplied against the soviets in afghanistan, that costs a 1000000 and a half afghan lives. and i would hate to see that imposed on the ukrainian people when under any circumstances. i've been through a war like that in vietnam. and i saw what we did to insurgents in the way of, i'm push several 1000000 lives that has not yet been the price in afghanistan, no matter what, what we're hearing about or crimes which it will could be so and negotiated outcome in which concessions are made on both sides, however, unsatisfactory might look to many people on both sides, could save hundreds of thousands to millions of lives. and i would like to see that

happen. i don't think it will, though, i don't think it will. wow. and on that sobering note, i want to thank you for your time, daniel ellsberg. thank you for joining us on. thank you. all right, everybody, that is our so up front, we'll be back with ah ah,

[000:00:00;00] a a with wherever you go in the world? well, no line goes to make it feel exceptional. katara always going places to go in depth analysis of the days headlines from around the world to try right. extreme

is there is real and need to be tackled as soon as possible informed opinion. why is the thing at all positions concerned about this rather small in turkey, anthea then, really with all 30 disappointment, frank assessments, you know, that was a joke about the interim government that it's not in for him, nor does it go inside story on al jazeera. ah, a palestinian is killed in the violence after 2 israeli, cept as a shop said in the occupied westbank. ah, hello there i'm is darcy,