is growing up in greece means taking action. welcome to generation change a playful series. it takes to understand, hollins. the idea is mobilizing, use around the world. we need to a political party that we'll talk about our problems. know how come from a generation? because 0, this is being seem the groups the size of the system as know for most dangers of working class people, there is a difference between being able to participate in the system and actually being represented in the system. generation change on al jazeera, new frame is to be supplied with cluster bombs by the us. that's despite of found by many countries, and most later. and that is the united nation. so such weapons are against humanitarian law because the indiscriminate. so what's behind the us decision? this is inside story, the

are welcome to the program. i'm adrian for the golden rule is a dirty business, but the decision by the us to supply cluster bombs to ukraine has crossed the line that many of its nato allies wouldn't the you and says the weapons breach international humanitarian law. the us says it has no option but to send them to ukraine because it's running as of conventional munitions, both the cues rush out of using cluster bombs in the wall. so why is the us doing this now? we'll be discussing it without guests in just a moment, but 1st a report from lower con these costs the bones are considered so dangerous, living funds by moving 120 countries. but the us says that'd be included in a new military aid package to ukraine. need to join the convention funding. they use know his russia one out to run out.

so just how dangerous all day. the missile countess does contain hundreds of smaller homes that spread out in the this means they are indiscriminate and can have a wide spread. i'm devastating impact. the international committee of the red cross says as many as 40 percent of the bullets failed to designate and compose the threats to civilians. decade slay to human rights watch accuses ukraine and russia of killing civilians with cost to weapons. the problem with cost of munitions is does rate because these munitions dropped large numbers of what are our bob let's depending on how they land. some of them don't go off british prime ministers soon . i didn't. i rec, the criticized president. job binding. but did say the person does not support the use of the weapons in general. the here, k is signature, e to a convention, which prohibits the production or use of cluster munitions and discourages that use . the u. k has itself been criticized for sending other weapons. the can cause loss

of environmental damage and serious illness to people long off to the was it ended in march she confirmed with provide all the piercing rounds that contains depleted uranium thus used by the us in a rock in the 1st gulf full 32 years ago they've left a legacy of tons of illnesses among people that as in other countries, bones point a to the international you can watch to a, b, i a, a, a says a could be a risk. the people who handled fragments of depleted uranium on the 2019 study and the general environmental pollution link. the use a shelf in the war to rock, to a sharp rise bus to fax and come to the us says it must send cost to bones. know because you crate is running out of conventional weapons, but even some house representative and biden's democratic policy have criticized the decision, saying the weapons will kill civilians and leave the us unable to multiply the high

moral ground to the war, fight of the tactics it previously refused russia, as you say, nora holds the inside story. i'll just, sarah. well, let's take a look at the legacy left by cluster bombs. the united nation says that in the last year it finalized the account 2021. it recorded at least 360 casualties globally. much traffic is, are expected when the boy ukraine is included. in the 1st 6 months of the conflict, $215.00 civilians were killed on $474.00 injured by cost of weapons. the cost of mediation, monica used by the u. n. shows that most victims of cluster bombs are civilians. in 2020, it says they made up all casualties of such weapons worldwide that you really call from casualties with children. with the age was known. acosta. well, when women and girls among the victims were people in countries where was ended some years ago, such as cambodia, los,

and iraq. let's bring it out. guess then for today is discussion from washington dc. we're joined by william taylor, executive vice president of the us institute of peace out of full the us on baset, a to ukraine from moscow. dimitri by the editor at in allstate, internet media projects, and also joining us from washington, dc. sorry, a go, washington director of human rights watchable. welcome to you. we'll. let's start with you 1st, but that you are in favor of the transfer of these weapons to ukraine. as i understand it. why is that? when i'm in favor of ukrainians. a big being victorious over the russians. the russians have invaded their country. i'm in favor of ukrainians, having the ability to stop the russian invasion. i'm in favor of united states

supporting ukraine in us. attempt to stop the russian invasion and the rest of may go is joining in that effort. so i'm in favor of ukrainian victory. it turns out, as you just reported, that the way that the ukrainians can move to victory goes through our tower. they need our tower and it turns out again, as you reported that the artillery rounds, the stocks both in ukraine and is united states are running out that they are running out. we are running out, ukrainians are running out of the unit. terry, artillery weapons munition that is not in cluster bottom. so the only thing we have left to provide the ukrainians to stop the russian invasion and to push the russians out of the country out of the brain. are these comfortable? no one likes this. no one is comfortable with this decision,

but if the decision is to allow the russians to overrun ukraine, which they have said they want to do, this is what the russians are after is to destroy and ukraine. wipe it off the map . adrian, this is what they've said. if that's the choice, then we have to provide these weapons. i just want to play with a clip of white house press secretary jen saki speaking in the, the early days of the war about customizations. here's what she said. no legal costs are bombs in my direction if that's true. what is the next step or visit ministration? is there a red line for how much will be tolerated against civilians in this a man or that's the legal potentially it is. it would be, i don't have any confirmation of that. we have seen the reports. if, if that were true, it would potentially be a work crime wondering if the potential use of cost of munitions in ukraine is by

russia is a war crime. the insinuation here is the rules apply to others and not to the us and its allies. rules apply to everyone, adrian, you're no doubt about that. all the rules apply to us, the ukrainians to the russians and everyone. there's no doubt about that. the question is, how to stop this illegal immoral invasion by the russians of ukraine? and if the only choice is to use these weapons that have been banned by some countries, but not others. if that's the only choice, then i think we have no, it's a moral choice. it's a moral choice to support the ukrainians in their defense against the russian regression demitra, babich and moscow. what do you make of, what are your thoughts so far? well, let's get the fact straight 1st. there was a human rights. what the report, i think back in the early 2015 may be within late 2014. but the

ukranian troops used to gloss to weapons and it was very well document that then confirmed there was 200 sports people on the ground who interviewed the victims who showed the places for the cost of blocks for used properties that were weighed 30 ports of the use of customers by russia bought the 1st. i didn't see them. i mean, i didn't see them uh or in, in the international news reports. there was a, if they were, they were a lot of was documented. and also let me remind you that in 2014, 2015, the ease of our north russian troops who participated in the war that started then as not in 2022 about these. whereas then we'll go in search of the so called pro russian a separate or just us uh, the key of government. you pulled them. uh, let me again remind you that the government didn't give k my to bottle offense with

wireless cool. in, in february of 2014. so you'll create, as far as i remember, do not use in the last 2 weapons in ross with tonight's using glass to weapons. so we have these situations here when our ukraine definitely used gloss to weapons rocks from probably allow the united states once you're going to use cost a weapon. so unless you've scale that started, well i don't want to white wash the russian government. there is a big discussion going on in russia where that it was bought, that you know, to, to get involved in and all out. well, you know, that will stop the bone being and the shading or don't boss, which continued for 8 years. but certainly it is not the way to stop the wireless by a tardy. so, i mean, these are those big kids weapons. it's like, i get to make sure i'm against using that. that's using the term eco y, as in the charts has been the apartment's. you utilize the jobs of the sides. i was

going to be by using chemical weapons. you know? yeah, i just got to ask you to retrieve this. to make sure i was going to ask you to us as cross on it. if, if ukraine uses these weapons supplied by the u. s, does it cost on a red line for russia? is it, would it? but then, do you think be justified in, in responding in kind? does it give russia to use a to, to, does it get brochure at an excuse to use weapons that are other weapons, all kinds of weapons sort of band for humanitarian reasons. uh uh, well you said that uh, and even though no one of the russian government sets so far any to know on that subject, i think that will be a logical consequence. i don't think the resolved will be the ukrainian allow me pushing the russians out of their land. you know, let me remind you of the media. so people use their best and as their wives with russia in the last 8 years, same crime here in don't ask, in lieu, gone,

these are russian people speaking russian and they will not become ukrainian in future. so if they bring in government returns to control over these started just as going to be a huge human tragedy. what is going on now is also human tragedy by pressure will not give up those stairs. if you bring us used bosco weapons rocks, you may also use some very destructive weapons, not necessarily new ones, but some very destructive weapons in order to protect the people who roderick and see. this is citizens, the people living in the, in the, in don't you have to now is that the phone even in the buildings have. so next to great music, i see the reference citizens by all so every single used to protect them from class to extra. okay. so sir, i'm sorry to keep you waiting. i'll be with you in just a moment because i know you've got lots to say, but i just want to give william the right to reply that way. where is the threat to the people of you crying from, from russia? it's not as life threatening to use it as, as the uses of cluster munitions. adrian,

the read to the people of ukraine from russia is existential. literally, the russian government president pulls and it has said that there's no such thing as ukraine. he wants to weigh ukraine off of a ma'am. um, so yes, there is a direct threat to ukraine, ukrainian citizen as ukraine civilians. we agree about the need to protect civilians. everyone agrees about the need to protect civilians. it is it's ukrainian civilians that have been killed by russian indiscriminate attacks. not just by own cluster bombs. so, so yes, there is an ex, essential threat to ukraine from russia in this invasion is recognized by the world . sorry, i go, what's the human rights watch this position on this? sure, thanks for having me. and let me just say, i deeply respect ambassador taylor and i agree with most of the things that he has

said today, except that plus your munitions are going to make the difference in this conflict that has not been proven. it is very hard to see exactly the military utility, because the pentagon has not shared its data either on gun rates or the effectiveness of these weapons against the russian threat. and there are 2 big problems that i see. one is humanitarian. there is no way to make these weapons harmless, absolutely no way, and we have already documented ukrainians using cluster munitions. we just put out our findings earlier this week that civilians ukrainian civilians have already been killed by ukrainians using cost through munitions. again, there is no way to make these harmless and 2nd, there is a global norm being broken here. the majority of the nation of the world's nations have bad these weapons specifically because they are too dangerous for the battlefield. i am worried both about what is going to happen in ukraine and what is

going to happen on this slippery slope for conflict in the future. sure. other, any circumstances that would justify the use of custody additions and you, if you i don't, i don't believe so. they are in the shortly indiscriminate and visit argument that russia is using cluster munitions with a very high done rate. you know, the argument that ukraine should use, cluster munitions, as well as a race to the bottom. and i am very concerned about that. including for new cranium civilians, they continue to kill and pollute, often years after they've been deployed regardless of which side prevails in this conflict, someone is going to have to deal with a long term human environmental impact or leave large tracts of land unusable. i mean, who's, who's like, go to pay it to me, who is responsible for clearing up in the united states is the largest donor to uh, do you mind the efforts around the world? and because it used cluster munitions and anti personnel landlines in various

places around the world is giving a lot of money already because of the exxon exploded ordinance. these does that are all over you. credit is $73000000000.00 to clean them up. that is without the u. s . cluster munitions being set. so this is going to be a massive expensive cleanup effort. and president biden is going to have to address this when he goes to vienna and talks with the european nations about reconstruction, rebuilding and the money that it's going to take to clean these up. and both of the techno and i know you want to come in, the us dropped an estimated 260000000 trusted munitions in laos between 19641973. so far, fewer than 400000 not point 47 percent have been cleared and at least 11000 people have been killed according to which has these weapons pose a fault race, a threat to civilian this when they do their intended ministry targets. don't think there's a reason why so many nations refused to use them. a hey, adrian again, no one wants to use these weapons. every one would like to have the regular of the

unit, jeremy weapons, a unitary ammunition for they are temporary. there's no doubt i don't dispute or anything the server just said or that you'll just send. and you asked about the clean up. yes. that's that will have to be played off. yes, the unexploded ordnance will have to be cleaned up. it turns out adrian, as you well know, that the mining that the russians have done is extensive up and down the line. the estimates are 10000000 minds, not any personnel, much somebody for personal mind, but mostly anti tank minds. they are the about 10000000 up and down the line in ukraine that the russians are planted. they'll all have to be dug up. they'll all have to be d d if you and you're exactly right. so the united states, as preparing so for and has already provided and has provided the d mining capabilities, we will provide more. i'm sure the gradients are working on

d mining capabilities. they're going to have to be cleaned up all of those $10000000.00 and the tank mind up and down the line are going to have to be. and at the same time that they're cleaning up the any tank minds and defusing them, they will be cleaning up the, the costs of munitions, the dogs that are still there, by the way, the done rate of the russian mines, the russian, a cluster mind fussing munitions is in a 30 to 40 percent range, whereas the doug rate, according to the defense department, is one to 3 percent so that they were still have to be cleaned up. no one likes these weapons, no one likes to stand munition. would it be better if we didn't have to use them, but to have the choice is allowing the russians to run over your brain and take it over the best that that's the danger disability is that the danger to do we brand new civilian. dimitri rochester, transfer these plus the munitions to ukraine. smacks of desperation of what does it tell us about the conflict itself?

the fact that, as we heard from a best of the outside of the ukraine, is running out of the conventional military weapon raised munition. and which side uh, if it either is able to gain some sort of advantage militarily as well. i think the best i knew from here would be a compromise. unfortunately, it's the united states and the, the european union who don't want to compromise a single grade. they so she packed the negotiations, so that's what went on in east on will last year in, in march. and we were very close to a compromise with ukraine. it did not presuppose russia around, you know, william green or wife and ukraine. uh, off the map suddenly which i never said that if we can send that the if you wanted to make your brain secure, what actually if you want, if you're going to be the minute drive and do not support, this is the exact quote. he didn't want to destroy your brain as

a country. he probably means that he wants to destroy either your brain and reveal, even though he didn't go as far as saying that as for the future as for the perspective so, well, let me tell you that of course it's a sign of just the reason because the united states, why does this uh, pre keep it that uh, sending us made costs the web store the congress. there was no waiver, all the, all these pretty patient by the congress. so if we believe the washington post, for example, president bar them is in fact uh, some call may be even uh, making an extensive use of his presidential powers. to me, these shows that tonight the space has become and i don't want to go steve, just like the nazi of the corner just by the way you go states in the past. we know that in to 33 in states, i do. what would your goal was before the war? the main thing for the alternative or like georgia, which is no rain, so they're not the states and that you were being union. you still have your brain

. s a think that they don't care about the losses. they don't care about you bringing people, they want your brain to win as the say. so that's why the radio to bend the rules to, i'm sorry, breach the loss, to send the most destructive weapons state. just want to see the side when. as for us, share of cost. well, very, very unhappy about these, but very on said about the need to put the land mines a certainly what didn't present, what did the planet when he stopped at the so called me to get the reason you know the family last year because sort of the way the we will have to clean it up because there are, after all, mostly russian, people leaving an east and you great and, and if you read the united states press, it recognizes this back in the night, just the back of the 2000 only now they keep saying that your brain is such a separate country, built in different from russia. it has a completely different identities. you know, we have a joint identity in many ways and we will have to clean the top our cells in future

. that's very unfortunate because as you rightly said, gloss to weapons are very dangerous. they keep exposing, they keep cheating people use after they have been used on is huge. whatever level it's shorter ink it's, it's up. so theme for a different police simply human rights, which on these occasions, not the same cost of us do brain and for break even both rushing brain, but any use of cost of weapons. and this what i want to bring in sir, if human rights watch. uh, once again, as we said at the beginning of the program will, is a dirty business center. and those as be held in our report depleted uranium used by the us and the rock in iraq and 1st gulf war. a 32 years ago has left the legacy of kansas and illnesses among people that didn't other countries bombed by nato, ukraine's also been using british supplied weapons that contain depleted uranium. is human rights watch concerned that the people of the border region in ukraine and

russia will suffer in the same way as people in iraq. and we don't have any research on depleted uranium at the moment, so we can get into that a little bit later. let me just make 2 quick comments about what's been said 1st president by and actually made this decision and signed a waiver completely within the rule of law within the united states. it's a shame that he did because congress thought that these weapons were far too dangerous to send anywhere and made a prohibition against transferring them to any weapon president by then within the law, signed a waiver. and it basically, just as we're going to prohibit these except when we really need them. and i think that that's really unfortunate. i also just want to go to this done rate because everyone is talking about what the pentagon has reported about the dod rate. we actually have human rights watch has done a bunch of research and has pentagon reports going back to the, to thousands. they actually have a 14 percent done rate on these very weapons. now perhaps there are variance that

the pentagon is looking at, but they have not provided any data. so within our democracy, there is no transparency about where these numbers are coming from. and so to repeat them that there was a 1.5 percent on rate, a $2.00. we're hearing these variations. every answer is different. where, where they tested on what kind of ground and what kind of circumstances we're not getting any of those answers. and i think that that is a real problem in this case. ok, i best of the time that we might just put it before i quit for from you. if you, if you want to, i give them the do force in any rock about this use of depleted uranium. then most times of nature have signed up to this international panel trust to munitions. now to the secretary general, i am still in the book said that the, the alliance didn't have a full position on the use on the baffle field. and that the decision on that you should be down to individual countries. i mean, what are we to make up that the best? no unity among other lines. so the use of width is that many members find

a bar and, and a pledge not to use secure general's exactly right. they know what they know as an, as an organization doesn't decide on weapons, individual countries. individual members do, we've not heard any condemnation from nato members of this decision. why? because they recognize it's a hard decision. they recognize it, that they don't like these weapons. we don't like these weapons, the congress doesn't like these weapons. the defense department doesn't like these weapons, but they all recognize that the alternative that is no artillery rounds for the ukrainians and so on. acceptable is unacceptable, morally, militarily, politically, it makes no, it makes no sense to have the premiums run out of weapons and not be able to defend themselves against the russians that are in bathing their country. so the nature of the nato members, they don't like it. we don't like it however they recognize and they,

they by their state, but they recognize that as an individual decision by the american service. exactly right. the president may use the waiver that's in the law. he doesn't like it, he's present bite and said he doesn't like this of this decision. but again, if the or if the decision, if the alternative is to let the russians overrun the ukrainians, he's not gonna let that happen. okay, and we've got a, we've got about a minute left. is there anything you want to say about that the use of depleted uranium? i know we're talking about cluster munitions, but the, the, the use of depleted uranium in that region of the world right now. i have nothing to add to what you, what sir, is that? okay. all right. uh dmitri. believe the but the last with to you then bear in mind, i've got about a minute left on the program. so i need you to give me a fairly concise answer on, on what you've heard and from a, i'll washington guest in the last few moments to well, i would just say that it looks uh, our opponents uh, that when you to use glass do with us that when you do use depleted uranium,

how come there for peace? how comes the defendant democracy by such means, the same goal was about the origin down. if they destroyed monuments, if they can, so for the days, if they destroy lead or religion, maybe they are, they will give bias. maybe they all go by this country where they change order tradition some of the rules, maybe not us, but they are, that there's a that i'm afraid we're going to have to read it as always on inside story. even though what i'd, i'd love to give the rights of reply as to what even sarah in, in washington, and i'm afraid time is against us when use weights for no one on that. and that's next. thank you all for being with us, william taylor. dimitri damage and silver diego, and thank you for watching. don't forget, you can see the problem. i get it any time by going to the website out to 0. don't com. for further discussion on this issue, join us on our facebook page. you'll find that at facebook dot com,

forward slash page the inside story story, and of course the conversation continues on twitter. i'll handle it a inside story for me, adrian said again, and the same here. and though thanks for being with us, we'll see you again, bye. for the, the, the, the mediocre you know, is the correct kind, communist rental, only to be disappear, of families, tragedy entwined with a violent chapter, countries history. when you see that, but let me say, is that going to be my blood will not work to a nice long search for

answers and close finding salon. witness on out easy, or how do states control information that's controlling the narrative to dominating the media? how does the narrative improve public opinion and norma? spite, you might not be the most important story about china of today. but that's what the big piece of attention to. how is citizen jim listened? rephrasing the story. the listening post, i fixed the media. we don't cover the news, we cover the way the news is covered. there is no channel that covers the world news like we do, we revisit places the state houses are really invested in that. and that's a privilege. as a journalist, respected the street and central concave shows you how to have a state to be effective. russian for me has to be, i can see where 2 of the bullets hit their about. my head highs. member of the

mentoring military wanted him dead, the stealing manual beneath. we were in a property on the road, costing out his ear, english proud recipient to new york festivals through the cost or of the year award . the 7th year running of the tennessee as president projects allegations that his government, as miss theresa and the black african migraines, as hundreds, remains trend to different photos of libya. the settlement isn't a problem and this is allen to the on line from the also coming off an attack at a kindergarten in china. at least 6 people killed children on.