ah, it happened with a super sonic boot last weekend. the u. s. fighter jet shot down a chinese spy balloon off the atlantic coast just off the coast of south carolina. we don't know much more than that. it was an apparent case of the shoot. first. ask questions later. so what about that balloon? and why did the pentagon just confirm that there have been other balloons sent from china? and before this happened, beijing and washington said that they wanted to mend tattered relations. was that true? or was it just a lot of hot air? i broke off in berlin. this is the day. ah! what became a spy balloon has become a trial balloon. and i commend president biden's leadership. and unfortunately,

the president failed that test. this is lee unintended entry of the airship into u. s. airspace is an isolated accidental incident. a mom, we sent a clear message to china that this is not accepted to this man. acceptable and irresponsible behavior present was paralyzed for an entire week via boldly also coming up the deadliest single attack since the russian invasion of ukraine began tonight, a report from the city of denise pro they were ordinary people, leading ordinary lives in these homes. now at least $46.00 are dead, including lost his parents. nasty, lost her boyfriend, a soldier, just months ago to the russians. but to our viewers

watching p b. s in the united states into all of you around the world. welcome a we begin the day with a chinese spy balloon shot down by the u. s. and the pop heard from washington all the way to beijing. until a few days ago, you a secretary of state entity blankets plans were to be in china today for the 1st visit by a top us officials since before the pandemic or that trip was canceled due to what is now being called balloon gate. over the weekend, the us shot down what it says was a chinese spy balloon. beijing has called the response irresponsible, and it says that the u. s. shot down a weather balloon. u. s. fighter jet down the balloon over the atlantic ocean, just off the coast of south carolina on saturday after the balloon had drifted for several days all the way across north america. some republicans in washington have criticize you as president biden for not taking action sooner on the other side of the pacific bay. she has been trying to play down this incident and is accusing

washington of over reacting. well, good. as far as i know, it's not the 1st time the scientific research balloon lost control internationally . the an intended entry of the airship into us air space isn't isolated, an accidental incident, but it tested the u. i for, from fair to and maintaining china us ties, and it's crisis management. we help the less we'll work with china to avoid miscalculations and damaging relations. what might be, where now that the balloon has been shot down. what next for china in the united states, i'm joined tonight. why michael hearst. and he said of trying to research with 20 to the research in new york city and by mark montgomery, he's with the foundation for the defense of democracies. he joins me from washington. d. c. gentlemen to both of you. well, it's good to have you on the program, michael. let me start with you. help us understand here what china was trying to do

. what, what did we see here in, in this balloon that was moving across north america? well, i think that's actually the hardest part here is to determine china's intentions. it's always difficult to speculate what's happening within china's system. i think based on the comments from us, defense officials, i doubt that it was a weather balloon. but i also would be skeptical that this was an intentionally provocative act on the chinese side. surely times military knew, you know where the balloon was going and what the goal was, but i don't think that china's leadership wanted to scuttle the trip or, or wanted events to unfold as they have mark. what do you think it will allow that if it were, if we believe the pentagon, this is a spy balloon for beijing, it to allow it to cross into the united states. i mean, that is quite the, the bold move for beijing to make well,

1st thank you for having me. and i do agree with michael that you know, that i tend to think that it probably more than a weather balloon based on the u. s. department of fences, right? strong, you know, indications and comments that it was a surveillance book. why try to do this? i, i most of a photo. there is not a logical reason. it was totally brazen to run something at 60 to 70000 feet out to it. that's clearly within our territorial airspace. and it is not something that's done routinely. people, people tend to think that we're flying aircraft over china, russia. we do not do that. you know, the, the last time we had a weather incident problem, you know, back in 1960, with gary powers. you too. that's about when we had did these kind of, over flights with aircraft over a major power like china, russia. so we don't do this, why they would do it back at us is a real question to understand. and i tend to think it can't have been decided the

very highest levels of the chinese communist party because the risk to turn on this was was backwards. yeah, i want to talk about that in just a moment about, you know, the communication that is or is not taking place with in the communist party. in china. first though, i'd like for you gentlemen to take a listen to, to what the chinese, what people in china are saying about what happened. take a little so you may well i so i think this is a bit of an embarrassing moment for the americans a meal because the u. s. air force, which prides itself on being the world's leading air. felisa, surprisingly, did not solve this civilian aircraft problem quickly. la, they drank it out for 3 days. you have you had your own pool, a fund. yeah. validated from my perspective, when i think about it, if it were u. s. balloon which had floated to china, we may take similar measures from a personal point of view. it's probably not a big deal. it's understandable, considering that the current international situation is very tense. i think i can

understand the reaction from the united states military, ohio for a nearby they're, they're making a big fuss about this incident, but it doesn't do any good. it doesn't serve wells face. so like a, making a big fuss over this me does, that's the way beijing wants the world to see this. if this balloon had been said to collect whether data, i mean, if it had gone, of course, as, as they are claiming how do we read the fact that no one as far as we know from the chinese government from beijing attempted to alert the americans? right, that is one of the questions here. if this were a weather balloon, but you know, what i think is most interesting about the interviews that you just played in the comments is that, you know, i think on the whole, this did not generate a very intense reaction domestically with china. because after all, it is the loss of one below. why that matters is that i think this whole episode

shows risks to the relationship. if we do have a more serious accident or miscalculation in a particular, i'm worried about a situation where you have both the u. s. domestic public and the chinese domestic public up in art. i know that we had that this time we had certainly the u. s. o, or at least a portion of it. and of course the media fascinated by this, but i think we've kind of dodged to bullets so to speak by the fact that for china, this is not as much of a big deal. but another crisis, for example, over taiwan, could put us in a very different dynamic in market. what about the role of the u. s. president? here you could pose the question, why not pick up the phone and call president she and demand an explanation at the beginning of this. instead of letting it, you know, cross north america out before you say ok, go and shoot it down. why not just pick up the phone and called beijing and say what's going on? but i'd separate those. i think you're absolutely right that, you know, from an opportunity to call talk was she was missed here because we certainly had

the predicate for a conversation with this balloon doing here. and in terms of how the president, in the military handle this, this is the right, this is the right move. i mean, you don't shoot this down over us a territory, you know, because of the, even limited and small risk, a fracture of ground damage. they did that, they handle this exactly appropriately. but the part that's not right is the initial response in, you know, missing that opportunity to talk to china and then also not a learning the american public for about 5 days of it. it just, it popped, it popped over the top of montana, is the 1st we see it when clearly it had been traveling us air space for about 4 days before that. and martin, this apparently is not the 1st time that chinese spy balloons have been spotted over us territory. me, that's what we're just learning of now. is, is that something that the public should be alarmed by or, or how do you read that?

so i'm, i'm a retired u. s. navy. andrew spent most of his time in the in the pacific and i'll tell you that we routinely, you know, saw surveillance alludes and surveillance issues. they didn't pass over your territory routinely, but certainly the idea that 1 may have passed over guam or the aleutians and the island chain off of alaska or the hawaiian island chain would not have been uncommon, but that also wouldn't have incited this kind of press response that's why there's this confusion, i think, between the trump administration, by the ministration officials, the previous passes, were not like a large balloon, you know, laboriously passing over my tan, missouri, and exiting in south carolina. you know, let me ask both of you, michael art with you this balancing act that the united states in china are engaged in right now. you know, we're talking about 2 adversaries militarily possible. at the same time,

we're talking about the world's 2 largest economies that are interdependent and almost every facet of the economies of both countries are married to each other. the reaction that we saw from washington and from beijing, does that tell us that these countries, are they perfecting the, the balance act, or are they actually losing their, their grip here? i think we should be worried about the grip that the 2 countries have. and i think the reason for that is we have a mix of intense mutual distrust and also some very difficult domestic politics in both countries. and if you look back at the relationship, you know, there have been 2 near crises in the past once when the us accidentally bombed chinese embassy in belgrade in 1099. and then of course the collision between us plain and chinese military plane, off the coast of hein on in 2001 both of those were successfully diffused the question is, could we diffuse that kind of episode and this kind of political climate?

and i think, you know, we have to be worried given just the reaction that we've seen from, you know, from this that, so i do worry about what this means in terms of our ability to avoid a spiral between the 2 sides. if there's another incident or an accident or miscalculation mark, what do you say? i mean we, we know that for now there's no trip to china for the u. s. secretary of state plans to improve relations between these 2 countries that obviously still need each other. what, where are we i do think we're going to have a challenge. i think broadly the united states has, has been an absence caretaker in the, in the pacific for the last 20 for years while we've been heavily involved in the middle east. our focus is finally returning after some awarded attempts in the obama and trump administrations. i think president biden's team is becoming more focused on the pacific military's more focused on the pacific. our economic

leaderships more focused on this relationship and whether there's fair practices in our trade with china, and that is going to pressurize the relationship. i think that i want to say it was a free pass. the chinese got a pretty limited hall pass for the last 20 years. and now the united states is saying, wait, this is the appropriate way to. this is the transparency we expect to see. this is the rules based system where we're advocating for and we're in strong disagreement with china on a lot of basic principles. so i do think they'll be a lot more, a conflict disagreement in and, and competition, and crises over the next decade. german to both of you. we appreciate excellent analysis tonight, michael hurst with the 20 to the research and mark montgomery with the foundation for the defense of democracies for both of you. thank you. and have a to ukraine now were residents of denise probe are

still coming to terms with a russian attack. last month, at least $46.00 people were killed in these 3rd ukrainian city on january 14th. when a russian missile struck a block of apartment bill you see right there. many residents were trapped under the rubble. some were successfully rescue, but it remains one of the moors deadliest single attacks against seville. he w mcsaunder went to the ne bro, he met one of the 1st responders on the scene after the building was hit. and he met a woman who escaped with only her life. now he needs to take a moment. this is the 1st time jenny has been back here. he just got home from the theatre with his wife when he heard the explosion and rushed to the scene. to help us is what i as such a meaning, a kidney do we cannot sure which will be a glad in order to bill some more to their schedules construction of surviving

euclidean, the, it's a visual element. terrible as to what you were going to say of then you wouldn't just name what she knew pulling a book doesn't hold those hibler gene could actually eco so shut which league of what your machine motor to be little resuming with some more then they found someone who was still alive 0 to the city with the other people. that everyone you believe it is also addressed to play it separate on the at the new luchella's gym for now. don't cry you in the hub naval as it isn't of little. he showed no. what does a solar another renewal is in a huddle. when they know stobel will we need directly is

a fair will not mahalo, which i will of to comes tanina. another amalia, a little bill of said shit for your fee for her brochure. but this remains the only good part of the day for him. they were ordinary people, leading ordinary lives in these homes. now at least $46.00 are dead, including nastiest parents, natalia and maxine, the family lived on the 6th floor, sallie mae a bunch. kimberly ha dozier, bree eton and my eves aaliyah loves that are willoughby. the former, shocked i said, with a terrible wrath, as perchance convey name by score doomed resolve was rewarded even as a v. i should have a book this for you got the in the bama for from with the to book was the ah, the about the mosquito? so be scorm. davina mahovski's voluntary that the bomber hard to fishable an

opinion of patrina matters of the the bama was between them very num, missouri, the velocity of all in the holy to katie for the luke of ali, is the c to whole naca, the mileage and the team brit door car. it, shaw numbers. all blizzard with it's is a crowd key charge um when the balloon us number 3 empty air. we need a question. it's on the mileage to several or nice units at the ah. exotic to put it down only shy sheila for b dollars on e. thank you. when you put a number, you had to know what the chair. ah, but he is cause alimony. 9 digit which i am we should our her was in the monarchy. renee is but alex you called mrs kara with an e. yes because our number one is alicia. i snuggle canada i had because i cannot go to examine throws book either dea with clear away his rosamille. i shaw any shahan

and watch them voice showed the ah, blue collar. and as it was a meal of cecilia of september and the missouri bullet, they had they bore nasty, severe. oh star for it. oh, sits me die? i steal it. shall which are r e r 's rosamille? i shall stapo. i say, yes it was in me. i showed the cave national not within a really to you. we had our stanislaw speed of alice issues name of saddam graham, which gives nestle dis dollars. it's a value even then i let us on now still lost her boyfriend, a soldier just months ago to the russians. yeah, even cuba, thank you. k, which of i and then of is did see the days i live night civil guys rydner living. it's a civil law which of law the dollar. she says her parents taught her to be brave.

her determination not to give up is now their legacy. for more on this, i'm joined now by roxanne cohen, silver. she's a professor of psychology, medicine and public health at the university of california, irvine. she's specializes in trauma research professor. it's good to have you on the program, the ukrainian people, they have been traumatized. they've been terrorized by war for almost a year now. we're talking about a nation psyche that has been under constant attack. what do the people need in order to cope in order to survive this? well, i think stream li, important to recognize that living under war is extremely stressful. and i think it's very important that we acknowledge the incredible stress that the

people of ukraine have been under. or as you say about a year. i think it's very important that we recognize, however, that there is not one size fits all response to the stress. we might expect that people across the country are dealing with it in many different ways. even people within the same family. we hear we've been hearing this now for for months, the west sending weapons to help the ukrainian military defend itself. it seems that it's the battlefield that, that gets our attention. are we neglecting what the civilians need psychologically in this? i think it's very important that programs like this are acknowledging the incredible stress that the people in ukraine are under right now. and i think it is important that we recognize that people are in this together. they have one another

that they can seek support from. i think it's important to recognize that as i said, there isn't one way to respond. so there may be some people who may be experiencing more distress than others. we have tremendous loss. and i think it's important that we acknowledge the psychological, the potential psychological consequences of war. we know from other countries stand people who live through a war and very often sanitized by this, but not everybody. and i think it's important to recognize that there is enormous variability and professor, do we know what the, the reporting of this war does to the psyches of the ukrainian people? i mean, we do this burger and we talk about what people are going through mentally, psychologically, but we also report and show images of the war on

a daily basis. what does that do to the minds of the people watching? yes, i would like to acknowledge that that is of some concern to me, the research that my colleagues and i have been conducting for over 20 years suggests that graphic images and amplified the distress that people are feeling. so i would strongly encourage people to monitor the degree to which they are exposed to graphic images, to monitor their media intake across all forms of media, social media, traditional media. because the images in fact, are quite potent. and we have seen in other contexts that graphic images can both increase the likelihood that people have ongoing psychological symptom mentality. but also physical health in this is barry. this kind of stress and ongoing stress

can be psychologically and physically. and let me take that and step further. we do, we report every day on the war, but it's, it's almost impossible to actually report from the front lines of this war the, the consequences of that are that we really don't have a lot of images of the fighting that we can show. so you don't have those graphic images. is that a blessing or is it a curse for the people in you cry? it's a psychological blessing, i would say, because we are able to see in our research that it is the graphic, gruesome images, images of blood, people, maimed people dying people dead that are most psychologically harmful. seeing the chaos and understanding that the war in and of itself is extremely important. however, to keep it in people's minds, to promote action, to ensure that people are support support of their how they're

compatriots. so i think it serves in for psychological purposes to be beneficial, not to speak to some images, but i'm in no way advocating that we are reporting or in any way. sensor water that we're providing the 1st before we run out of time. but you know, i was really glad that we were able to get you on the show tonight. you've researched national traumas for more to terror. attacks to natural disasters, in your opinion. has humanity learned any lessons in how to best cope mentally and psychologically with these horrible events? obviously, we haven't learned the lessons of war, many would say, but the lessons and how to code have we learned it? i think we've learned a few things. one is how important it is for people to engage in self care. that is to monitor the media intake to try to sleep, eat, and exercise if possible. so we,

that's one message we learned. the 2nd message that we learned is how important social support is. so how important it is for others to reach out to those who are under a lot of stress. and the 3rd message that we've learned, as i've said previously, is that there is no one size fits all. so some people may want to talk about what they're experiencing, others may not. and i think we should acknowledge and have patience for our peers and friends and family who may choose to respond to this event very differently. the other thing that we know from professionally research are unfortunate professor, we're out of time, but i just want to say thank you very much. you remind us of how powerful just a helping hand can be the someone in the professor roxanne cohen, silver, thank you. thank you very much. the day's almost done. the conversation continues online. you'll find us on twitter at d. w lose. you can call me at brent golf tv. we will see you tomorrow

with eco, india. from them, the most common mode on the ones that are at ones are just to feel completely they cite the survival, thousands of animal species on the indian subcontinent. conservationists are committed to satan goolsby from the red rhythm dolphin to the common sparrow.

eat with d, w algorithms instead of paints and brushes. artificial intelligence is a conquering the art world. new technology is, are becoming ever more created. but can they replace humans as authors and makers? and do we even want to that can artists and anti co exist? artist $21.00 in 60 minutes on d, w. o. a little nar davinci is mysterious master for this, 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 painting that perhaps we just don't understand today? search for answers starts february 10th on d, w. ah large or small on land or in the seats, all living organisms on a link in the chain of life cooperating to survive and maintain ecosystems. but powers of species threatened by.