week it was a move to south asia, very settled picture for much of india and pakistan. we seen some flash flooding in the north, west rainfalls heavier here again on wednesday. that is an improving picture into thursday. was the more in the way of dry as skies certainly across the north west of india. places like new delhi remains logic here along the west coast and cloud coming in with a few showers here and there some heavy, a showers affecting southern parts of india, like carola and some thunderstorms for sri lanka, with a wet weather moves away from bangladesh on thursday ah, it's a $1000000000.00 money known drink operation. the coal mafia is big of in the company with financial institutions, regulators and governments complicit about ways altering with right. i've described that in a 4 part series. algio 0 is investigative unit because under cover in southern

africa, it's better we can fill 90 percent of the government once it's to the following. it's perfectly brandon, good part to on al jazeera, russia has assume the presidency of the united nations security council. take you all the position while wages war ukraine. so what does this mean for the un? we can it still play the role it's founders hope for seeking? well, this is inside school. ah ella, very welcome to the program. i'm. so russia has taken over the presidency of the u . n's, most important body, the security council. it's ascension on the 1st of april, was marked as a world worst april fools joke by ukraine's foreign minister, given russia's invasion in the past. other countries, such as the u. s,

and the u. k. have also presided over the security council while waging war on iraq . for example, the makeup of the council was put together in the aftermath of world war 2, with vito's for all 5 permanent members. but does it fit for today's world? we'll be discussing this and more in a few moments with i guess. the 1st offended monahan reports on the debate over russia's presidency of the security council. the present for the next month. russia will chair the un security council. the council's presidency rotates every month. and that gives the holder some influence in shaping this agenda through. but some members are objecting to russia, sharing a body dedicated to pieces security as it wages war and ukraine. shorter, he's gotten bullshit. yesterday the russian army killed another ukrainian child, a 5 month old boy. the parents are wounded, one of the hundreds of artillery attacks that the terrorist states carries out

every day. and at the same time, the russia presides over the un security council. it is difficult to imagine anything that crimes the complete bankruptcy of such institutions of ukrainians are pushing for russia to be removed from the council earlier. but even if allies admit that's effectively impossible. unfortunately, russia is a permanent member of the security council and no feasible international legal pathway exists to change that reality. that is what we are living with currently as unpalatable as it may be to see russia presiding over the council. the reality is, this is a largely ceremonial position. russia's presidency hasn't. bolden some critics of the un veto wielding members like russia and the united states often prevent the council from acting time. but they're also been breakthroughs. the un successfully broker to deal in july allowing ukrainian grain to pass through the black sea un officials and also been active a europe largest nuclear power plant,

which has been call in the crossfire between russian and ukrainian forces. the but both sides are gearing up for a new offensive and ukraine. the war has brought big challenges to b u. n. and many requesting what role can play during the larger scale conflict in europe since world war 2. 7 since and model him al jazeera the. so let's bring in august now in moscow we have done this love minister coverage international relations research at the financial university under the government of the russian federation in helsinki, rasmus hinden, head of international relations at the european center of excellence for countering hybrid threats. and over in brussels is steven the chief diplomatic correspondent in europe for the new york times. welcome to all of us dennis love. if i could start with you in moscow. so let's just get this straight country in the act of fighting

a war that killed tens of thousands of people is now head of an organization that was set up to promotes peace and security. it's absurd, isn't it? well, you and it was organized to prevent a 3rd world war, a super big war. everything else is just a question of interpretation. so i think your hand played a role in prevention, the 3rd world war, everything else. so, you know, america, waste war, russia, waste, worse, many other countries reached oars, including countries that are considered to be a permanent member. so the security council and countries just a just part of security council not being permanent members. so i wouldn't say it's absurd. it will be absurd to get russia out of nice nations because this new united nations will not be recognized by china or somebody by india. so still it says x is a space for a discussion which is a still a square. we can. busy we can meet, it was possible to use us even in the period of cold war. why not use it now?

residents, what do you think? is it right that russia should add the security council? what is prosecuting this war and your great well, i think absurd is, is one a good way to, to describe it because, i mean, we have the country that has been designated and greg are states by the u. n. and we have a country whose leader is an accused more criminal. so in those terms it's, it's fair to, to call this situation upset. so in practical terms, what will russia bring to the table in its role presiding in the un security council for this time? yeah, sure. so, i mean, of course it's mostly a symbolic position, but it's of course, it has, the presidency has agenda setting power. it has a narrative power, and i think that's where russia will try to, to be most active, to,

to bring their version of the narrative to the, to the forefront, to, to spread this information as, as they did in february 2022. when they last held the presidency. now, okay, we'll explore that line and a little bit. but steven, 1st of all, of course, there is precedent. as i mentioned in the introduction, the united states, a chair at the time of its invasion of iraq. so really nobody can complain about who takes of the geno. well, i agree with that. i mean, these are just the rules, this is life. this is going to be un works un was set up a sickly to give special privileges to the big powers that, sir, that one second world war, one can ask quite rightly are those still the right powers to sit on the security council? should the security council still have a guido? should germany be part of the skirt of counsel in the separate cetera. but those

are reforms. i just think, you know, this is the un, we've had very odd cases in the past, for instance, we've had the syrian regimes sitting on the un human rights council, which i find as offensive as, as, as almost anything else. so, you know, i'm not terribly upset by it. i know why the trains are upset by it and i know why people are making, you know, kind of rhetorical, hey, out of it. but i do believe the un exists to have conversations. it does have its rules and i think it's just the way it is. we can not like it. we can like it, it really doesn't matter. it's going to take a lot to change it and it won't be changed by tomorrow. i steven, can russia use? it's german ship to it's, it advantage is residents is just alluding to well,

i'm sure i can certainly try. i know it wants to set a debate on arms control for instance, which it has its own point of view. it has its own narrative, but it may have other debates, but it wants, but the fact is, i think it won't change the world's understanding of what's happening inside the crime. i mean, they're already some countries in the world like china who are embarrassed by a world. so permanent members who keep saying they believe and territorial integrity and yet do not condemn russians invasion of sovereign ukraine. so there's lots of contradictions to go around. that seems to me, incentives, i've said the enables russia to present itself as a legitimate, well pled to its people back. i am rushing back at home well, of course,

refreshing the permanence member or security councils or, and i did nation which is much more important than international criminal court. so let's say it's not recognized by many other countries, including us and china, to sugar. it's a counselor as much more important than let's say, general assembly of it mostly make just rhetorical declaration for nothing more. so definitely it is important for ensuring alicia to miss your freshman power inside russia. it is important for external legitimacy. russia is recognized by china by india. i mean arabic countries, white global false, i would say. so there's using with power over the world and the one ukraine doesn't change it with necessary to understand and to, and to meet that intuitively necessary to have a deal with russia anyway. even after this military conflict is somehow resolved, it's done is love. i just wanted to ask you, as well as what you made, what dmitri polanski said, who's the rushes deputy pendant representative at the u. n. and denying that this,

this concept that russia was becoming a pariah, the united nations. and he said that i think it is a west that is isolated, but not us, not russia, in the general assembly, it's getting a bit far as net. well, i wouldn't say that west is isolated west country, important part of the world in itself, and many other countries outside of the west have trade relations and political relations, diplomatic relations and migration relations with the west. so i wouldn't say that west as isolated, but russia is not associated as well. and russia is not a state, you know, just recently, chinese leader was it says moscow with a free day wizard. how can you call it from any country parish stage when it's wasted by a leader of the 2nd superpower in the world? so let's say that russia and western countries both have their own narrative, then not isolated in the world, but they are to a large extent, isolated from each other. it's true to say that russia to a large extent,

as isolated from the west, but not on the global scale with less admitted residents. i just want to back up a little bit better. understand the role of the security council department members of the council of u. k. u. s. france, china and russia. tell us more about the establishment of the security council. why it was set up and why those nations, in particular, while he was obviously in the aftermath of the 2nd world war and with the 5 countries gathered the most powerful countries to become the permanent members. of course, russia wasn't originally part of that, but pretty soon also then became a part of it. but i mean, as well. so already explained, there has been an attempt to reform the security council almost ever since. it was established in the 1st place. but reform is really difficult, so we're still stuck with this current format. and because basically any change

in that system would require that all the permanent members would agree to the reform, which is why we haven't seen, haven't seen that reform happening effectively. and in conflicts like this one, rushes aggression against ukraine. we see that the, the security council immediately becomes paralyzed because it's a permanent member of the security council that is the aggressor nation. it's steven, there are those you who question whether even russia holds illegitimate seats should hold us legitimacy on the un security council. given that when it was established was the soviet union and not russia ever had that seat. well, it, i mean, russia is recognized as the legal inheritor of the soviet union's seat. so i don't think that's really in, in question, frankly. and also it is where saying, i mean, the united states recognize as russia has a great power,

that's not the issue. and the united states recognizes russia was position on the security council. the question is rather a different one, which is the paralysis that rasmus just described of the un security council, which has veto power over everything including anything to do with it. i mean, normally in the judicial system, a party that's involved would require use itself from a decision, but instead, any needs, any member of the sturdy council can block anything that it, that it actually likes. and frankly, if russia didn't block something, china might blocked for it. so it is a kind of paralysis. it's just a kind of moral conundrum. or perhaps it's simply, you know, international relations and international law to me have

very little to do with one another. i know we want to make it so, but in my experience, covering conflicts in general, international law isn't the deciding factor. what's deciding factor is lots of things including power. you should ask, you know, mr. newton, why he went into ukraine. i think he had every understanding that he was breaking international law, breaking deal, and charter. it simply didn't matter to him. status of it. what do you think about this, this concept of the paralysis that's created by any single member be able to, to veto any full resolution? it just means that it's toothless, that there is never any progress. well, i think it to those. so by design, it was designs this way to satisfy the demands of winning power of the 2nd world

war. you can, united nations security council cannot make your move against united states against russia, against france, against great britain, and against china. so it, so by design let's, let's admit it better to have it then to have nothing. it is a way to, at least to resume, i mean to deal with some differences to some different political positions. this is the way to prevent the 3rd world war. and from this perspective, security council was more or less successful that from the point you feel being a global policeman. well, of course, it doesn't talk this way just because the different countries was different agendas, probably find people in 90th in the beginning of the 21st century this. so the security council will be global policeman. but, you know, russia have a phone position. china has its own position and you can not to mention the kind of a was a global government global policeman. in a way security council exists without support of russia and china will be not

working. and what's about danger. what about brazil? by the way, it was russian idea. so probably includes these countries and these countries sorta could have had a long history of the debates with russia, which is possible to include in jan brazil into the security council. and i wouldn't say that it will be easier for west on the countries to suppress. i don't know russian political regime if india and brazil joined security council, i suppose it will be when more difficult for the west in the world. in this case, do you think that is the case resume if you broaden the membership that is going to create more difficulty and more intractability going forward? i think the question of the reform is, is a bit more nuanced. i mean, there is the question of broadening the participation in the, in the security council, then there's another question is what to do with the veto power? then there's a question of what is the, the role of the general assembly and,

and should that be also increased a little bit. so i think it's a little bit more complicated question, but i mean it's, yeah, it's fair to say that this current set up is, is not really reflecting the reality of the situation at the moment. but i also think that what that, what stephen was saying that normally in this kind of situations, one would expect that the country that is involved in the conflict, in fact, is the aggressor to recuse itself or from those considerations around that conflict . but of course, that that hasn't happened yet and resumes this, this concept of vito part was just an error of judgement at the establishment of the insecurity counseling. is that something that, you know, looking back at the founders, if they were able to, might wish that they've done differently? well, i mean, yes, in a way, yes. and that's why the whole debate around the reform has, has been going around for, for so many decades. but of course,

it was reflecting the reality of the moments and yeah, let's just say that the great powers, no matter how we define a great power, they are really reluctant to, to relinquish any of any of that power. and this is just a reality. we're living with or we've touched on that briefly, but let's explore more about the security council's role, especially in ukraine and stephen, as far as the conflict is concerned, what has the united nations managed to achieve? first of all, well i think good terrorists, there's good sector general has felt kind of on the side he's been finding, trying to find ways to in search the un into the conflict. which is difficult for all the reasons that, that we've just been talking about. but, but the un has been very much trying to be an agent for the countries

that need ukrainian grain and, and russian fertilizer. so, working with turkey, the united nations was instrumental in, in creating a system whereby ukraine could export some of some of its grain. i think the u. n. as international atomic energy agency has been very, very important in trying to raise the world's consciousness. not just, and also the russian military consciousness of the dangers involved in the war around some of you trains biggest atomic energy plants originally built under the soviet union of course. but they are, you know, as is our parisha in particular has warfare all around it. it has had electricity

cuts it's, it's been very, very dangerous. and i think russell grossi and his team have done a very, very good job in trying to keep it safe. so i think that's important. and i think we should not underestimate the importance of organizations like u. n. h, c, r, and the world food program and unicef in just trying to help the poor who are most affected by this war. they, they're not combatants, but they are also victims in status. love, those are the positives that stephen has just itemized, in terms of whether you and has failed. as far as this conflict is concerned, is to know what your perspective is on that well, i agree with that part of you and to tell you important for everyone. for example, foot program is important for cultural social issues are important for everyone.

and once again, i want to underline that you are still living, we were able to survive the period of cold war and you and played a role that which was the midday take place for discussions for resolving conflicts . yes, not all the conflicts or prevented that was worse all over the world yet, not korea in africa. many other puzzles a lot of, again, it's done, but there was no shooting war between so rich union and not just face of america, between storage block or so fact and nature. and this is one of the results that can be call to great success of united nation. so can you nation? so what about what about this project on this? it could be used later particular today. well, i think of a great deal is what can you and can do to deal with about search lasers, international atomic energy agency is also very important me day to hear. i will

not be surprised to, for in that diplomatic relations between russia and ukraine could be restored with the help of you and why not. so i still do believe that you have something important to our residents. it certainly failed to certainly fail to break or any kind of piece as of this maybe, but i guess when the end as when the end of the conflict happens to you and is going to play the key role in how things progress. yeah, it's possible that the that the you and will, will play a role there and to get the overall legitimacy of any deal. it would be important to have you involved. i think in practice there might be some smaller groups of countries that might try to act us as mediators and, and go between and i may be good to go from there. but of course, in any of these plans, the most crucial thing is to, to see what the, what ukraine is ready and willing to do and, and, and hopefully hopefully then,

then a solution could be worked out. stephen, do you think at the security council could have played a bigger role in trying to achieve some kind of resolutions of the conflict as of now? oh i wish that were true and might have been true before february 24th of last year when russian troops cross the border. once that happened, i think we're stuck, but it is possible that the u. n. could have done more, i think, to try to resolve the conflicts hard to say, because ever since the, my dawn in 2014 and the annexation of annexation of crimea, russia has, has basically violated the un charter and, and violated ukrainian sovereignty, which rush itself had recognized as early as,

as the 1991. so you know, in the end you can only solve conflicts when 2 sides want to solve conflicts or when they're exhausted. and i, i think that's a moment that has not yet come, then probably hadn't come before much after 2014. so i don't really blame the u. n for this. but i do think there was a lot of complacency about ukraine and russia after 2014, when many, many thousands of people were dying in the don. the us in bass screen, undeclared, war and stuff. love a. ultimately the ball is in president putin's court. isn't it? to find resolution to this conflict. well, i've put in is one of the most important places or world now including ukrainian, ukrainian crisis,

but she is not alone here. i think he waits for some most from the west of the world as well. he wants some kind of distinguished ations that can and this military conflict too. but in the situation, when the russia can say that it got something, for example, they've got this land car adults. crimea secures, i think it could be enough for pushing to explain to his own population where she she was successful, but it is necessary to recognize it from the western world as well. if let's say mr . biden said that he is ready for this kind of deal. in this case, i think conflict could and residents. and finally, if we just come to you in terms of we've been talking about the reformation of the un security council, certainly, president biden has said that they support increasing the number by permanent non permanent representatives of the council. but as we've discussed, that as making that happen is difficult, can you say, i mean if we spend for, say, 10 years in a decades times it, is it going to look as it does now because it,

as time goes on, it looks more and more. okay. yeah, i agree. i think it's one can't be too optimistic at this point in the long term. we don't know. suddenly there might be some, some new avenues opening for actually making the report reform happen. and i think right now is really not the time even to be focusing too much on that reform. there are other pressing pressing matters at hand. but if i could just go back also to the previous points made and whether the un failed to, to prevent the invasion. i mean, i wouldn't blame the u. n. but, but it was in a way, unfortunate that russia had the rotating presidency of the security council a year ago back in february 22. and it used that opportunity to talk about its peaceful intentions, which basically said to erode the support for,

for the other countries. to, to have a coalition to prevent that invasion. so it was an unfortunate the timing in that sense and allowed a possibility for russia to, to, to spread that kind of meets or, or this information i was, was present that going have to leave it. in fact to, i guess thank you very much indeed. just done is love me to coverage to resume syndrome. and to stephen, i like it. thanks for joining us. and thank you, dave watching. you can see the program again at any time by visiting our website out there, dot com for further discussion. just go to our facebook page that facebook dot com forward slash ha inside story. and you can also join the conversation on twitter. handle is act a j inside story. for me, the whole team here with

ah and those that know do those that understand? teach, cook a maverick school headmaster in post conflict, gulf fast determined to change the fortunes of an inner city community, plagued by urban decayed poverty and the legacy of sectarian aggression arms. as students with the knowledge of the ancient greek philosophers, protest veil on your birth, what is very everybody else is very young. plato, a witness documentary on a jesse either across the globe ecosystems under immense threat a bit later started moving back. it started melting all there is something deeply wrong in this drawing. something we can not create

a thrice explorers had. the law is beginning to hold multinational to account. we're all connected f neighbor by those emissions. and how the idea of giving mixture legal rights is altering our relationship with the planet. this is what it's all about. it's about ensuring that like when i can continue planetary justice on al jazeera, when the news breaks, some buildings that had already been damaged, have been further pushed over to one side. others that were close to collapse when people need to be heard. and the story told, i couldn't tell them that i was a musician. while i was supposed to be burned with exclusive interviews and in death 2 pools, each centimeter of this stuff represents a year of life. al jazeera has teens on the ground to bring you more award winning documentaries and lives. we don't simply focus on the politics of the conflict. it's the human suffering that we report. i. we brave bullets and bomb and we always include the views.