mysterious master, ah, it is perhaps the greatest leonardo masterpiece in the collection of the louvre and no, it is not the mona lisa. it is the virgin of the rocks, 2 versions, multiple copies, and a hidden drawing. was there another symbolic meaning to this beautiful baby that perhaps we just don't understand? a switch for answers starting february 10th on d. w. as soon as the west agreed to supply ukraine with heavy battle tanks, ukraine started to demand formal residents. zalinski saved his country urgently needs by the jets an submarine. now this has fogged the heated debate and international politics. u. s. and germany have refused to agree to this new demand

. others wonder if that a dawning through diplomacy could be the way to end the walk. so today on to the point we asked new weapons for ukraine. read us the why to aid leave with hello and welcome to do the point. it's good to have you with us. now before we start, let me introduce our guests. we have make connelly nick walks as foreign correspondent, with deutsch umbrella. he has been reporting extensively out of ukraine for the last few months. welcome back. next on the panel is professor of gong maker. he is skeptical about sending more arms to ukraine. and last but not least, we have bus island motley. she is security expert at the german council on foreign relations. she's also based in berlin,

but she's joining us remotely today. let me start with you. you've been on the ground. you've seen the situation there. now russia has been attacking residential areas and ukraine claims now that russia is preparing for an offensive for the 24th of february. can ukraine really hold its ground quite literally? well, i think that's definitely the conviction in care of i think they are positively surprised at least what in terms of the kind of arms are being supplied in the last couple of weeks after long period frustration and kind of cools on the west to send more we've had to kind of flurry of announcements of new equipment or so the question mark hangs over when this stuff is actually going to arrive in the front lines. i think there is a sense and there isn't really fear that threatens are going to make a lot of new gains. but the question is, how fast will you grain, or will you create a tool be able to reclaim 30, that's been lost, the russian since 24th february 22. so i think it's more about can ukraine make significant gains before some kind of negotiations restart negotiations?

we say, i linelle come to you now, now you creams and it needs heavy tanks. it needs a long range missile systems and is going to get that as well. germany has agreed us has agreed. other countries are going to provide things. but now when we talk of a fighter planes, germany and america, they're both extremely, very of that. what's the reason for that? i can't tell you exactly what the reason for that is. but my assumption is that as has been to reason and motivation throughout the war so far, especially in germany, but also the united states. and their leaders are afraid of escalating and contributing to an escalation of the war by way of sending new systems, including fighter jets professor matter. do you think that by delivering more and

more weapons to ukraine, the west is in a way pushing potent to escalate the war? put in doesn't really need to be pushed to get t deeper into the war. he is a caress, or there is no doubt about it. nevertheless, we are dealing with a crash or, and we are dealing with an dictator. and he can decide without all these checks and balances, we haven't democratic systems. he can decide more or less on his own or in this very small in a search. what he wants to to, and what we have seen in the war is that he begins to a initiate and you turn in the escalation in this is quite obviously what the americans and part of the german government are

afraid to off. and this is what i expect and at the end and war has to be ended by negotiations. the sooner the better. you've said negotiation, you also mentioned negotiations. now nato allies had barely settled a week's long stand off over the supply of battle. thanks to ukraine. and now a new confrontation appears to be viewing after tongues will there be negotiations for fighter jets and submarines. berlin wants to supply ukraine with 14 that the 2 tanks. other countries are also taking part of all poland and norway. the usa wants to send abrams tanks, but that's not enough for ukrainian president lensky who says his country needs much more to defeat the russian army just williams. my sank all those around the world. politicians, journalists, and ordinary people who insist with us that that can be no taboo on supplying

weapons to protect against russian. tara keith once f. 16 fighter jets, but you as president joe biden draws a line that rate go with chancellor all of show it secretes for fear above the escalation. ukraine is also demanding a submarine from germany. alms deliveries to ukraine, really the only way to force russia to negotiate all the critics rights and fearing that the delivery of potential offensive weapons could end in a 3rd world war must the west give ukraine everything it needs to. when showed the last go on delivering everything that ukraine asphalt island, i'd like to ask that question deal. where does this really and should the west go on delivering things? i cannot predict where any of this will end. and i think there's nobody in fact can . however, if the goal of the west is to,

to continue supporting ukraine in its rights, just claim to reclaim territory, to fend off rushes aggression to sort of 2 to hold on to it some of the rapids future at surcharge of integrity. then i think it is necessary for the west to continue supplying ukraine with weapons by the way, not only new weapon systems, but also and initially for systems that have been delivered already artillery systems. for example. there are numerous reports of some of those, some systems running out of ammunition and the west are scrambling for, for further supplying those munitions. so as a question of both of you weapon systems, but also the question of i'm continuing to sort of to supply ammunition for systems that have already been delivered and are still necessary on the path fields to to,

to be used. but ukraine of also asking for gentlemen submarines, do you think that's realistic? i think is so i wouldn't want to preclude that the german government at some point will rule in favor of that seeing the sort of the history of especially a germany in supplying ukraine with weapons. it's been really a history of, of, of the, of wavering. i'm essentially and then in the end of germany has almost all the time given into and his demands. this am ukraine made in concert with its allies. so i wouldn't now go on records. precluding germany might changed its mind on that matter. traverse america. we do see a delight, there are some countries that are more than willing to supply the other countries

that do not want to supply the extremely hesitant. how do you really see this? how do you interpret this? do you think within has managed to create a rift in the west allies, or would that be a strategy of the west? i don't, i don't see any risk with among the western countries, putin was quite on sex unsuccessful. to create such a cleavage between the different countries. of course the countries have and different. she'll strategic position. we have the baltic countries, we have poland. it's not the same as we are looking to portugal or to italy. so there is a very different situation. if it comes with geo politics, and the other thing is, ah, there are different historical memories. and of course, poland and the ball, the countries have different ones,

and they want to see russia defeated. but my hunch is, the more russia has to be afraid. slipping on the slippery slope in to a defeat, it will escalate because protein cannot imagine any can even not support that russia will lose. it is his fate as well. it as his fit as well. nick, you've been on the ground as i said in the beginning. now, how do people in ukraine see this? is there a sentiment that we have to win the war and there should be victory only then that's the end. or what did either prefer a solution to dialogue and diplomacy. i think there's very little support in ukraine for some kind of negotiation sooner on russian terms. i think there's definitely kind of fairly broad consensus in ukraine cited that. russia is not going to stop that. they tried this in 2014, but they tried to freeze the conflict. they're basically tolerated russian control

premier. they left front lines in indonesia where they were, and that russia just came back for another bite of the apple and that russia, this time might use the time to kind of breather, to improve its army, to stuck up on spare parts. and to really then try again more successfully, 2nd times, israel since i have to grabs which unity, wild west sports ukraine, while you have joe biden. and the white house willing to really provide a lot of my finance and also weapons. and in case for instance, there's a 2nd trump presidency, the real fear that if you crane doesn't really regain control that search and i'll get some really kind of hard and fast security guarantees that this is going to get a lot worse, a lot more dangerous for ukraine's richer and m. orlando had recently said her ex are french president, that it's actually both in strategy that the western allies, they should get dire and they should just run out of ideas. and that's what they're doing and fighting amongst each other that we have to deliver thing, then they go on delivering. and that's the part of the strategy and only been put in is going to win. how do you do?

i don't believe that the western country will get tired. they are already deeply involved into this war. and the reputation of the military and the defense reputation of the countries, especially of the united states, to pens, to some extent, what will be the outcome of this war. and they cannot simply forget what they have done so far. they cannot forget that there isn't a caress, or which wireless international law flake or entry and so they will not get tired. i'm completely sure. and if you look into the discourses of our country, what are we debating about? we are discussing the situation of the war we are discussing to vicki cheeks, then we can and should get involved. and if we are looking to the

little sequence we have seen now in television, it seems to be that the president of the united states sees it more clear than many european countries, which are the risks involved in an intensification escalation of this war. you say negotiation is the only way out. how do the reach and negotiation funding? this is a $1000000.00 question. i don't have prepared. so you for that. what i'm asking for is we should explore it more intensively. we should start and we should, the countries should talk with a war party is russia and ukraine and the united states of america should push more. ah,

of course, poor dean, i will not do it on his own, but probably, and this is very difficult to say, and it's even not easy for me. might be that the dictator must be offered some thing. and we cannot start with maxima list positions and saying only we negotiate only then when the russian troops have left completely ukraine. this will simply not happen. the negotiations are important, but as you said, the ukrainians did on one negotiations under rush and, and also there's a real sense in ukraine that there's a lack of imagination in the west about russia after putin that, you know, there is not necessarily a given that putting the survives this politically in any scenario, and that if the loss is not adding up, if people from oscars in petersburg called up lose their lives, not just people from distant provinces that actually the kind of discontent russian

side could put him on a lot of pressure and maybe in a year or 2, the west might fundamentals negotiating with totally new people in the coming. but people do on the end of what they want the end of the war. but i think there's definitely a sense that russia has not given up its aim of destroying ukraine, the sovereign country, and that conflict is inevitable. and that they want to know if negotiation happens, do that for a position of strength and for a position where they can defend themselves. it's important. remember, here ukraine gave up, it's nuclear weapons in the ninety's and resume security guarantees. circle budapest, memorandum u. k. the russian signed the americans and we saw that paper was totally worthless . those guarantees proved, you know, totally unable to defend ukraine. so i think your grades are really picking up a hard and fast facts on the ground and for real guarantees. they can then cool on, should russia try again? people in ukraine want to see the end of the war. why do people in russia want and how do the german see this? let's take a listen. according to polls, a slight majority of germans are in favor of supplying offensive weapons to ukraine

. do you think your mood? i think with western technology, you can show the russians that it's not going to work. and there's no victory for them, which is what they're counting on over. that's been pat sophisticated, i'm a pacifist, and i want to see ukraine being supported. he wrote on that. i think battle tanks to the wrong way had said that there should be more of an attempt to enter into negotiations to be in the middle console after all, if we send tanks to ukraine, but russia will soon attack us. this isn't that right? if psy rentals go off in our country, then it's really going to kick all it's literature in moscow, many played the west for the war and ukraine. the hostile moves, like these, only escalate the conflict for those who are interested in ending the conflict. and what recent ukraine are counting on negotiation youth on uber? unfortunately, we see that our west and partners have an interest in the conflict lasting as long as possible. but when i did submit my compass, the western countries say they are not directly involved in the conflict between

africa isn't interfering latin america is not a different, they don't supply anything that we're putting. but if you supply tanks than you're directly taking part slope, thank you. so a lot of germans, they believe that by basically by sending tags and by sending weapons, germany's directly part of the war. whereas german chancellor left charles, he has the detected that interpretation completely. ellen, let me come to you are talking of the legal concept. if you set your foot on the battle ground, you're directly out of the war. if you train people or if you provide intelligence that's kind of agrees on. but if you only provide veterans, then it's not a problem at all. why is that? so what's the legality around this? well i, i'm not a elizabeth, i'm an expert on, on international law, but as far as i can read them international law, it is pretty clear on that,

as you just pointed out in providing a weapons and children to ukraine doesn't equal or doesn't mean this of the west is actually a part of the conflict in somebody actually actively participating in the conflict and actually are in northern as being of international law. we're talking also us, you know, i'm holding the un harder. i'm here where it is enshrined as a country. it's had by another m sovereign country as a case in ukraine that other countries are allowed legally allowed to come to, to the countries aid. so if there's really no slippery slope, no room for interpretation whatsoever in terms of whether or not the west is a, as a party to am, to the conflict. however, i'd just like to point out one thing. obviously the west is not neutral either. we

have been at west has been standing by ukraine side from the get go. so we're not in so we're not to neutral of eater, especially in political terms. for this, michael, if there's no slippery slope, why are so many countries hesitant on sending weapons? and especially now we're talking about fighting jets from us in germany because of course there is a slippery slope. nobody knows how the escalation continues. and if you assume, and this is my hypothesis, if you assume that protein cannot afford to lose this war because is political and physical existence is challenged by then, dictators know perfectly if they lose for us, they quite often get executed as well. so he will do everything every thing, not to lose the war. and this is what countries know and even

obviously the united states of america, they are afraid that the escalation goes to something where nobody can steer any more, what is going on on the crown. and this is certainly an important point. the 2nd point is the people and the political elite in latin america do not have that much trust in to the west. the same is true for india. the same is true for indonesia, because they have seen even the democratic country, the united states of america, violating international law and attacking iraq. so they are talking about the west to speaking with to tongue, so to say, and therefore they are skeptical. they don't want to be part of it and to some

extent for them, it's an european war. it's not a war going on in latin america or in asia. a lot of people are skeptical, they don't want to be part of it. so while the western countries are busy figuring out which weapons to send and which not the newly elected brazilian president lola, the silver has emphasized the creation off. and i caught up the love of countries that want to build these on the planet. and he seems to have found a leader for the school up to well, brazil, brazil has no interest in supplying ukraine with munitions. if you, for this is now a time for china to get involved and help make peace between russia and ukraine. profess america, door lula, the silver mentioned chinese. he said our friends, the chinese. but what i found interesting was his choice of countries that he wants

to make the glove. but he mentioned apart from china, he mentioned india and indonesia. now brazil, on the one hand, is in bricks where china and india on the other hand it is, are in g 20 troika with india and indonesia. how do you see this? the is the power shifting to the global south? is the global south really blink? really going to play a very big role in solving this western conflict. i would like to hope it, but i don't have too much trust into it. then let's recap you late. who are the major players? the major players are on the one side. certainly russia and ukraine, but above all, the united states of america with out a new as will to end this war. the war may not, and very soon, and i'm anyway, skeptical that the war will end very soon. and i expect if you

listen to political decision makers, it will loom in to the 2000, then 24. and this becomes a war of attrition. and it means each day, $1000.00 people die on the crown. so the global 1000 can play a role as a new troll actor, but he will not be decisive. one, nick, russia say that will not return to an extended to me and salience. he says that he wants everything back even time. yeah. so what could be the solution if you're talking about negotiations, how did they really come to the negotiating table? that if that love a head start, i think we're not there. i think negotiations are a long way off. maybe if you know, 6 months, a year, years down the line, one of the sides is exhausted in terms of financial resources, human resources, then maybe there'll be willingness to kind of compromise. but, you know, russia claims console as its territory and that was,

it was retaken by the ukrainians last year. and it's even questionable where the russian knows what it borders. it's claiming. all right, now, you know, we had the kind of absurd situation where the parents press person was asked, where does russia end? and he couldn't give an answer. one question about going back to the global self interesting, the, there been some critical reports come out of your brain recently that pakistani major shells have been found in the ukranian army that ukraine is offering services to help bucks done with its soviet, made helicopters in return getting munitions, so i think if you look beyond the political open support, there is definitely the sense that it is proving possible to find resources and military equipment from countries who aren't necessarily publicly getting involved in this conflict. i didn't last thoughts coming back to again coming back to the role of media. if china does take up the role of mediator with the west, accepted annoying china stands. do you think china would be a partial mediator? you've said that west is not do you think that's possible?

well, it's not. i think it's a question of whether the west excess, a china, as a, as a possible broker and ukraine and russia. first of all, 1st and foremost from having to accept a mediator. and i'm pretty sure that russia would be more than happy to accept china as a mediator. but i don't think that ukraine would, would agree to that. seeing as far as anything but a neutral player. i'm in this war and is politically and has been politically supporting russia from, from the very beginning. and i just fight, choose the 1st point out. i find the wording it is your pina western conflict. a bit unfortunate because it is not. we're talking about russia's war of aggression against ukraine and not a conflict between russia and so on. the west, i have to stop you there. island. sorry. been running out of time. and one of of

you us on youtube basket quads. pardon me? 5. didn't of have mispronounced, the name has written, the enemy doesn't care. if you are a pacifist or not, he will not. he will come, no matter in what you believe. if you are also watching us on youtube, do let us know what you think about it. thank you for tuning in good bye and take it with

ah, with who enters the conflict. so some of the worst violence in years is broken out between israelis and palestinians. secretary and i'm going to bring them cold on both sides to calm attention and send a 2 state solution. only way to end the conflict. my guess with week is that of the

palestinian mission to the u. k. on the believe that's possible. conflict in 30 minutes on d w. how many of the wood i am lana c? i was cayenne. yeah. i am running for president of the republic of bell or rosie leaky with she is the wife of the upcoming petitioning the dictatorship. and then in a moment where she tries to stand up for her husbands, who destiny changes and she herself becomes a politician, john dunbar searches for the truth again. this time, the exiled turkish journalist meets sweat. nancy huddled sky, exiled leader of the opposition and bella luce, huge. because i'm tired, i'm tired. physically, i'm tired. morally. is too much on my shoulders,

but i have to hold dissuade because i am responsible for the fuse shall fall a contract for the people far behind the boss. sh. guardians of truth starts february 18th on d w. what do you think? what you get for 50 such a 50 said oh no, a lot of it this year with thinking coffee. els not a lot for so did you know it cost $0.50 to feed one hungry child for one full day. it could be one half day in the said, oh, with the share the meal, you could share your meal with children in need with just $0.50 and a tap on your smartphone. smartphone users out,

number hungry children like 20 to imagine the impact you and your friends can have together, we can end global hunger. please download the app with ah ah, this is the wi, from berlin. laudermill lansky says, whose country deserves european membership talks this year. the ukranian presidencies, pushing for swift entry to the block top a you officials attending a joint summit where the ukrainian cave later will offer hope without too many expect.