with pakistan, but you can see the arrival of that wesley disturbance moving across afghanistan. that's going to bring more in the way of west, whether across northern areas of pakistan pulling to the east. and if we have a look at the 3 day full a whole, you can see that rain arriving on wednesday, thundershowers on friday. ah, join the debate. we know that the sector seems empowered by the government and stand by the government today. they are to government africa, how security is also global, help security on an online, at your voice. there is no right to defense. there is no right to protest. we can't just keep relying on aid. there has to be some work towards a sustainable economy. at the end of the day, it is ordinary objects that are paying the price. this tree analysis era will vladimir putin go you here in ukraine?

the russian president said he'll deploy nuclear weapons in may when fellow roost. so could the war taken? you turn on how might motor respond. this is inside story. ah another welcome to the program i'm to clog. so president vladimir putin says russia will deploy nuclear weapons in belarus, not strong, sharp criticism from the west. the european union called putin's comments irresponsible and warned that russia's allied belarus could face more sanctions. crane has called for an urgent miti of the insecurity council. accusing moscow making mince nuclear hostage. pretend says the move does not violate any treaties and is no different to america facing. it's also of nuclear weapons in nature

member states. the russian presidents also warranty would be forced to react if the u. k. supplied ukraine with a p s. c, i munition containing depleted uranium semesters. pity. go of. as for our negotiations with president lucas shanker, with better is a pretext with the statement of the british defense secretary that they were going to deliver depleted uranium rounds to ukraine. but it is still connected with nuclear technology. it's obvious. however, even out of context of those events and this statement, lucas shank has been bringing up the question of deploying russian tactical nuclear weapons and better routes for a long time. the nuclear shanker makes it point by to the americans deploy nuclear weapons with their allies on their territory, train crews, pilots, and this type of weapon if needed. we agree that we will do the same without violating our obligations. so what about the relationship between russia and barriers swell that both part of the collective security treaty organization, and that's a military alliance of 7 former soviet states led by moscow. russia offered

financial support and security to the president alex something to keep shanker during a crackdown or major protests against this rule in 20. 20 russian forces also used a territory in better route to invade. degrade and launch and offensive against keith and russia continues to hold military drills in belarus, near the border with ukraine, force key to deploy forces that ah, i say we can join, i guess. now joining me in moscow is a pebble falcon. how, who's the defense of military analyst and utrecht? susie snyder is join us program coordinator at the campaign international campaign to abolish nuclear weapons and in london, some romani who it's an associate fellow at the roll. united services institute will welcome to all of you travel. if i could start with you in moscow, so let me preach and says, all this is in response to long standing requests from the belly received, lead, alexander lucretia came safe to say there's more to it than that orchestra has been

for some time publicly. were men thing if he made a grave mistake in the 90s? why and here re, patrick, the former soviet nuclear weapons from the territory of bowers to rush in the turn did numerous into a new queer state. but if he were to retain, he said these weapons and bruce would be better off. and he was asking moscow to return some weapons bank. and, well, right now russia sort of agreed. and this is more politico of course bargaining thing of the military significance is there is of course, military significance. but this is primarily political move to reinstate some nuclear weapons and there were rows. and of course, that will happen somewhere in the 2nd half of $23.00 of the airways is just about

really all it's about is just raising the threat level puzzle. oh, yes, it's crisis to some extent, the stress level go. apparently, these weapons will be kind of a double key mimicking a walk every year, and the american nukes in europe are double key, meaning needs are ok from washington and respective european capitals for usage. and here will be billed through some f aircraft, and bo, or roofs, and missiles supplied by russia. mean short range, ballistic is gone. there's the are nuclear capable and there be some brush and nuclear weapons stored that may be attached to them. but of course, of this way, give addition though, keep abilities, but not that much. this is not the cuban most. our crisis of b,

1962. because while russia has a cooling down the past, nuclear capable weapons and apparently the official is not confirmed nuclear weapons, and brands and go in grant is more to the west and boilers and more or less context . it does, you know, from the trenton people, thanks to that cities not at this ramp up, the danger of escalation due. thank well absolutely does increase the danger level . i mean, anytime that you start moving nuclear weapons around, there are lots of risks and what we're seeing here is they add the addition of new actors into the decision making process. and that opens the door to, to miscommunication, to accident even under a double key arrangement. there's still safety issues that are of grave concern, not only that, but it also introduces the possibility of further use of nuclear weapons or the use

of the weapons, which would be catastrophic no matter where they are targeted. and samuel, that's the thing, isn't it? because just the mere mention of the word nuclear makes everybody sit up and take notice, and this is the president using that kind of ramp up of the threat level using the uncertainty what he would perceive to be his advantage. well, i think that's been a long standing russian policy that really dates back out long before this conflict . i think that we saw the directions use us right up as you deter western arm shipments you and especially to move into tanks and fighters. yes. that clearly is daily giant. so now she basically rushing absence rather needle support for your grand continues one year into the war. and what susie's saying? also, you cannot throw into the pot the fact that the moving weapons to bela roost moves and place it to poland to vienna. lithuanian well, definitely does. and this has been the motion for over a year now because the russians held referendum last year to see 5 percent of the

people voted to keep these annual awards on their opposable under those non pre conditions. and then the preparations ra underway. and given the fact that russia has so many changes with poland and with land. yeah. over issues ranging from the trade from cannon in grad to poland, very hawkish, the board or the ukranian cars, early movement of taxi rapid increase in defense spending. representative gigi, pe, and was rainy as effectively annihilated the civil matter conference inside russia . this is clearly a warning chart and a threat to both of those countries as well as a show solidarity the dollar is because since the 2020 protest dollars is said, as sovereignty is being threatened, i need bipolar by the way, the i now you grant and this plays and you allocation this propaganda as well. suzy, outside of the general nuclear threat. how do you think? how do you perceive the game on the ground within the auspices of the crating conflict? how did it change that? do you think?

well, i guess it's what it is, it brings, again, like i said, more actors into this. and it also, it raises the likelihood of the use of nuclear weapons. and that is something that we have seen that repeatedly makes people in ukraine mix people in eastern europe makes people share at my neighborhood in tech a, you know, an hours drive away from us nuclear weapons nervous. and it increases our, our concern to a point that last year we had a run on ida and tablets, not just him in ukraine where, where we seen the images of school teachers trying to explain to children where they need to go. in the case of the use of the nuclear weapon and we have gender of generation, but this hasn't been at the top most of people's mind. and yet now it is. and we know we know without a fact that any use of nuclear weapons on any popular should be catastrophic, and there is no humanitarian response. now we can imagine the horrifying result to

introduce to nuclear weapons into the current conflict, in which there's already almost no human hand capacity left. and to bring it to bring this possibility to bring the long term effects of a nuclear weapon enter. this would be interest, be terrifying, and, and can struck. alright. we can see the threat. pebble. what about the time line here? you mentioned matron, 2023 experts to say that there isn't as yet, doesn't appear to be in the satellite imagery that suggests that there is a nuclear weapon storage facility is being built in batteries at this point in time . what do you think about the timeline is vladimir putin exaggerating the? how soon all this will happen? i. yes, of course you need them. ah, ah, nuclear special facility of the 12th main directorate of the russian defense ministry to keep the year and maintain the nuclear devices when they're not

attached to whoever a systems. oh gosh, younger has brought a couple years ago. but he, when he was asking for russian nuclear weapons that he maintained in good order of the nuclear facilities, the so called s bankers that were embarrassed during the cold war. and soviet times when, of course, the bruce and military district was one of the main and most militarized parts of the red army. and so right now you don't have to build it, you have to sort to renovated and see that it's in working order. and that's basically what, what you were saying that we're going to renovate it, so it won't really take that much time to prepare. most likely, the other thing is, does russia manage for really want to have nuclear weapons or any large numbers on the ocean territory? because even if it's on their russian kind of control their side to bowers and

military there. and now cassandra has demonstrated and said that he may want to have some nuclear weapons of his own to maintain his rule and using a new queer blackmail. so there could be some dragging of feet by the russian military because the earth does not bring back much mo, a tree, direct a village then, but bring some risks. so yes, the puts in say that will be after the 1st of july. but will there be there? how many will there be real nuclear weapons or just dummy's? question, the happy that's an open question. that's an interesting as i tool the susie isn't it. that the fact that if russia deploy nuclear weapons and batteries could end up being a threat to russia itself. oh absolutely, and i think that's something that is often underestimated the use of any of these weapons,

including what are so called these tactical weapons which are often described as smaller fish, still nuclear weapons. they have a massive impact, much bigger than conventional forces. and the use of these weapons would have a detrimental effect on the soldiers, whether they be russian, bella, russian, or ukrainian, as well as on civilian population. and i thought problem reference to the idea of hanging onto 2 weapons in the future in order to kind of do a sort of nuclear blackmail is quite, quite a powerful statement because that's what we see constantly see. the threat of nuclear weapons used as a way to blackmail co worse activity that otherwise the international community would not stand for. and it is very unfortunate, and it's why the successful actions we've seen every time or seen steps back from this has been of tremendous condemnation from the international community for these types of escalate tory activities. sorry. what about the arguments that the russian

president's arguments would peach and say, well, you know, europe, you host us nuclear weapons, but why should we not dispatch some to better express 1st will just tell us which countries host us weapons and how does it work? how many us bombs are there? as far as you know? i would like to say that, you know, 1st of all, this bombs are located in several different countries, resilient germany. you have turkey, you have vall, jimmy italy. so there are areas where new up is obese to stored. i'm, i think that, you know, the needle sharing is the knology that rushes, obviously using. but germany has said that, that's definitely not the case. because this is an act of ration and also russia as a really escalated to nuclear. blankenship moreover brushes withdrawing suspension of from new start, which are also followed to allegation that has been non compliant with di f agreement, which trump out withdrew from unilaterally. i points to a broader tendency of old rush using nuclear threat monitoring,

as well as that sabotaging change alarm treaties. and when he read, they rejected dialogue with united states in cairo. but infection seems to be a rejection of diplomacy in dialogue as well. the class that russia is even proliferate in each of the weapons. but because the u. s. nato have done that too. but it sat more in the context of brushes, other actions that makes this an alarming. it's concerning thing i think, but you can see something you can see prudence point caught you the years in europe work together. so why shouldn't russian bel roof not withstanding that the, the holes filled nuclear threat, which opens, he is enormous. but as far as his strategy is concerned, well, that's interesting, cuz nieto says statement about the russian nuclear diploma says that there's no discernible change. we noticed in the russian nuclear dr. so the russian nuclear doctrine has been restated many, many times to side of the war, sometimes is a veiled threat, is that russia will only strike the yeah, when you go up and if it feels as territorial integrity or security is under some kind of immediate threat but the problem, as it defines its territorial integrity,

very differently to include illegally occupied regency, the grand crimea, don. yes, the husk occurs on desperation. you get the picture here. so russia is effectively not only broadening the plan ration regime by going from brett towards beller as ralph threatening to use nuclear weapons to effectively justify illegal occupations in illegal seizures. the territory is using nuclear threats to justify violations of international law, whereas needed to go up is use are through sovereign agreements with, with respect to member states have been used to defend the sovereignty of countries under international legal frameworks. but neither was done is illegal, illegal in about board or russia is then, is clearly illegal. a pebble, what do you make of up the russia using a threats to justify violations of international law? well, russia is using, of course, it's nuclear arsenal. for nuclear deterrence basically, and that's how nuclear weapons have been used since 1945 by all sides.

and that's the basic who a gentleman because whoa, whoa, that's what nuclear weapons were made for, for deterrence, which is the same time and same word for break one ship or, or actually more west like back now. but there's worse. so that's when russian threatens of, there's that, oh, says that there's a possibility of usage of nuclear weapons because it's involved in a rather high intensity military conflict. as it is a nuclear superpower. yes, that's true. and that's the normal use of nukes a. but going from there over the new threshold to actually use the one that's a totally different story. and that does not seem right now. it's just you can say that that is impossible. it's not of it's 0 possibility. it's not 0, but it's not very high, right? now, because going over the threshold, well, nuclear deterrence works both ways,

and they're russian most work with does not want to go into a nuclear conference station at o, and is using it in the women that way, just ukraine also with bring russia much dividends are both equate or actually, militarily. so right now, i believe it's going to be on the main deterrents and blackmail, and that's where it's going to stay for the foreseeable future. oh, through did you wanted to come back? and at that said the use of nuclear weapons. not very lightly, not very high. right now. i'm sorry, with all due respect, we've seen overt threats to use nuclear weapons such we have not seen for generations. the risk of use is higher and it's been, you know, across the board. everyone acknowledges the risk is higher than it has been, perhaps since the initiation of the cold war. and, well, we'd like to believe that the years is unlikely. let's be really honest. here.

there are 9 men in the world to decide whether or not to use nuclear weapons and we cannot imagine what is going through their brain at any given moment. 9 the individual to make that decision to push the button or not 9 guys, so that the threat perception of any one of those 9 could change rapidly and could lead to the initiation of the use of nuclear weapons. and we know that once the order is given, it is minutes until others executed. and it's less than an hour until missiles arrived, where they're destined to go. so the fact that we have seen this is true that we're not taking these threats as seriously as we should, that is extremely concerning. and i think about what we have seen over the last year because the threats have escalated because there's been an erosion of a taboo against even threatening the use of nuclear weapons. states are responding

and states particular the states that have signed onto the treaty on the prohibition of nuclear weapons have made the strongest multilateral condemnation of the threat ever. and after result, they have been walked back and it is absolutely necessary for any state that does not want to see the threats to continue to sign on to that treaty and to put their money where their mouth and us suddenly am i not going to come to you in just a 2nd, but i just want to throw that to puzzle in moscow. do you want to respond to as soon as comments or paddle? oh yes, i say usage is possible, the possibility is not 0 but not very high. and of course, usage and several maintenance that's only about strategic nuclear weapons. they are on readiness. the tactical ones are not really so you have to attach the weapons to the delivery systems. the same delivery systems are being used in

ukraine. where is there another cruise massage with charleston you were capable now there use conventionally. so you have to attach the war hudson that will be noticed in view around by say, the american spy satellites. they'll help us that the russians are preparing for usage or, and they don't see that preparation happening, or the russians will notice that the americans are actually attaching the new to be your delivery systems. so we're not here to the 9 out in the minutes zone. we're talking about a longer time period where you can actually try and negotiate something on hot lines and not just simply press the button and go. right. so yeah, i can see what a jumping back come back to just a 2nd, samuel, what about the disease was talking about the nuclear proliferation treaty. doesn't this move undermine moscow obligations?

why the, he dash re degree. obviously though, the russians would come back with some kind yet that most likely this information exaggerated racial britain bringing you a team shall grant, which i think seems to be an extension of some of the dirty bomb experiences that we saw. the russians come up with a convey to the americans, the british, and the french back in october. but going back with hello, i am, you know, with depleted uranium, isn't it? not the same as a nuclear weapon, but still not, not the same, but that's where the russians are going to like the rhetoric with. in fact, i think this announcement in the timing of this announcement, even though was a contingency. all that goes back a year, was it related to britain's announcement about the uranium shells. but just go back to the broader question about a point that we're trying to discuss here. i agree that there's a non 0 chance of actually using their weapons. i think the peak of that in the short term is faded because i think it will bother my research in september for food. very difficult choice. i let you surrender mobilize or you go up. and it was very clear in china, in particular, pushed potent not to use nuclear weapons. and it was look,

is using based meeting in my care last week. no use of nuclear weapons as well as that know at bombing or destruction. their power plants are 2 of the 12 points of that piece plant. so i think that even if the west in russia and having dialogue about nuclear weapons right now. and that's a very disturbing trend because of russian function as a china, at least, is still put some pressure on russia to back off. that's why i think the chances are very low. as susie just come a 30 seconds, we're just going to move on. but just come back to that if you would. well, i think we, what we've seen is that put and had 3 things at his disposal energy, a massive conventional force and the possibility of, of use of nuclear weapons. the energy risks and the conventional forces have been decimated. i worry about how close he is to authorizing that nuclear strike, which as power noted, we are minutes away from a strategic strike. i don't want to worry populations. i think i don't think it's extremely likely, but it is a desperate concern and we need to make sure that governments take the seriously

and condemn it at the least. ok, let's shift away slightly from this is the threat to issue and to about of bella luce itself, puzzle. you mentioned that the bill. what's the role and all of this is acting willingly or does it just have to accept russia's plans? oh, the actually this is the most likely mostly there wickersham because i idea good boy where weapons in bella, luce and use both roofs and delivery systems as a did deliver these russian weapons. so he would want to have nuclear kind of capability at proxy, at least, i mean, after the rather disastrous 20, 20 august for presidential elections. his resume was a bit robbery. there was massive and the government demonstrations and he was one to and of course lots of western sanctions imposed. so right now,

the question with one to be seen as a nuclear capable leader, where i say the readers of north korea and i go down with these people, started jumping back. how did that go down with his people with the people of bella roost? do they support this? well, it's hard to say because right now, bill ursus arrived there. whoa, bear with controlled society. want the people really think about that, but we, you should mount this, the trunk of this fight being kind of threatening my good. possibly he would go also in some conditions in the conflict with ukraine is not mobilized his military and none of the standing doors, the motorists, tiny mouthful, he's afraid of going in mirage numbers a reservist because you never know ruin. bowers school, they're going to turn their weapons against. so he's to have, as a rather broadway regime economic where he is in

a very tight spot because he was always just surviving on by the mediating between russia and the west. and now he's lost keep ability. so maybe he sees nuclear nuclear weapons as a kind of source of last resort. okay, i just want to try and squeeze in a couple more questions. and 1st one to samuel samuel and ukraine is cool for an emergency meeting of the un security council. it's not going to happen, is it why this is she man likely to happen? and also it, even if it did happen, is she likely to produce any kind of guarantee results? in part because china as traditionally back rush f on the showroom says, no, i said earlier, that may not be wanting brush these nuclear weapons and they certainly, i'd not refuse to join you start negotiations. when the i say to try to put them in, in part because they feel that the washing nuclear weapon supplies completely the ones are be held in europe, are not sufficiently regulated by international tragedies. so i think that china and russia will definitely block this kind of investigation, and it will go anywhere in the un security council. as susie, finally, if we could,

we could have a min and a half left to say, in general, what would you say the crane war has done for nuclear proliferation? and once the war is over, how do we rebuild the trust that has clearly been lost? well, only thing is that it has brought the issue of nuclear weapons to the front of people's attention. and it's an issue that we thought was, may be gone and possibly forgotten that. and it is not, we have seen that states are overwhelmingly more states are joining the treaty on the prohibition of nuclear weapons to reject any suggestion of nuclear weapons. if any, the ret or any possession of nuclear weapons, then they are leaning towards nuclear weapons as some sort of security strategy. and i think 2 to one really, there more states rejecting the option of nuclear weapons. that is a pathway forward and to move forward after this war is over, we need to do my,

anyone that the option of holding the world's blackmail to their nuclear weapons. again, this, it calls for urgent action for complete negotiations to eliminate all arsenalt. fortunately, there is a treaty that makes the weapons illegal and provides a pathway towards their complete elimination. and that is the next step all around . susie, thanks very much indeed for that. and thank you indeed to all our guests a couple of fell going how susie neither and some ramadi, thanks very much indeed for this important discuss and thank you for watching. you can see the program again at any time by visiting a website out there a dot com. and for further discussion, just go to our facebook page. that's facebook dot com forward slash a j inside story. you can also join the conversation on twitter. handle is a j inside story. for me, the clock and the whole team here. it's by from the

me ah, with one day i might be covering politics in the next. i might, europe like hotel say from serbia hungry to 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 douglas 0. we believe everyone has a story worth hearing. it's a $1000000000.00 money known drink operation to comb. marsha is bigger than the company with financial institutions, regulators and governments complicit. not with it, right. i've described that in

a 4 part series. our job here is investigative unit goes on the cover in southern africa, pittsburgh, we control 90 percent of the government. once it's pretty falling. it's practically brandon, good. part one on al jazeera years from al jazeera on the go and me tonight out is there is only a mobile app. is that the, this is where we dissects analyze. i'm fine with from algae. there is a mobile app available in your favorite app. still just that barrett and tapped on made a new app from out a 0 need that you think of it ah hello, i'm elizabeth bronman, doha with the top stories on.