ah, chinese president, she isn't being, is in russia, he visit his good friend, a russian president vladimir potent over dinner tonight. the 2 leaders reportedly discussed the war in ukraine and beijing's ideas on how to end it. but are these 2 leaders? are they really pushing for peace if it comes with a radical reordering of global power in their favor? or yes, that seems unlikely for now, a real piece in ukraine that's made in china. that seems unlikely to. i'm break off in berlin. this is the day. ah, hope the c o, so that the main political goal is to create let's see, western rate for making a trip with china signal that they could even do more to help russia.

and of course, china still depend on it to convert commercial relations with china will not get involved with who tend to seriously and to deeply simply because the risk of putin losing is to baked over the other hand to see if either logical. ready a leader and that of relations with united states continue to deteriorate. they could do a lot more to the naval russia also coming up one of the defining moments of the 21st century began 20 years ago. and many still asking why did the us invade iraq? paula, we assumed it iraq got rid of the tyrants. saddam hussein and the country would be in better shape, but it was one tragedy after another saddam has gone. but we got 1000 other saddam's domino elephant done. we're to

our viewers watching p b s in the united states into all of you around the world. welcome. we begin the day with what china wants and what russia needs. the leaders of china and russia say that they are good friends, they're 2 countries, they say are in a friendship with no limits. that is the glossy version, if you will, the way vladimir putin and she's in pain, want the world to see them. the reality is still being polished, hooton's power has been significantly diminished since his evasion of ukraine began last year with no european market for energy. rushes economy is now much more dependent on china much more and find out like never before. beijing's ability to project power. it can now easily overshadow moscow's decision being, he's trying to look like the global power broker. and now that button recruitment simply cannot be just consider saudi arabia and iran. we have more now on to

presidents who are balancing they're out of balance. relationship standing shoulder to shoulder to authoritarian leaders defiantly pushed back against western values. nato and the united states for russia's president, she's visit is a diplomatic qu, showing much needed international support. as moscow becomes increasingly isolated with the model over the study social groups, i am very glad that you found it possible and found the time to come in the evening and talk in an informal, friendly atmosphere about all issues that interest us. for chinese president jean ping, it's a chance to play a global peacemaker. and to project china's power in the face of warnings from the united states, the message from the u. s. is clear. beijing will endure harsh sanctions if it provides moscow with weapons for the war in ukraine. she and potent are determined

to craft a new world order. one that according to them, does not follow dictates from the world sole superpower. yes, john, we are partners in comprehensive strategic cooperation. jerry, it, in this tacitus, that determines that there should be close ties between our countries. major way she and potent were expected to discuss beijing's 12 point piece plan, which calls for negotiations between moscow and keith. but it doesn't mention a withdrawal of russian troops from ukrainian territory. it's an emission not lost on ukrainians. big thought, a little shaw, throw the color of one dictator has found another law, but again they attract to each other. but it will not change much if they get support for the war from china, gives clear when leaves us. but on like a book out of the 3rd the, it seems like some kind of game,

like they want to tease the western world of. that's my a with yes, dexter legal, ukrainian president for low demure zalinski has made it clear that no peace can be achieved as long as russian troops continued to occupy and attack his country. and he is an interested in giving any ukrainian territory to pollutant zelinski and she are expected to discuss the war on the phone. in the coming days. william joy nell bites him ruling. he is the senior research fellow with the german council on foreign relations here in berlin. he is also the author of the book, shyness, foreign policy contradictions, which looks at beijing's attempt to influence media politics and information in western countries. mr. williams, good to have you on the program, and i want to pick up on this dissolution of contradictions. and in these 2 presidents said that we saw today and the relationship while i'm your procedure

being the what the world to see them as partners standing side by side being on the same page with the same goals. almost as equal partners is that, is that the truth? is that what they really are? yes, to some extent. thank you so much for having me. first of all, i really think that we do sees really balancing our issues for china. here is one example. once more of a contradiction on the one site, china has media, strong interest in keeping loving the fortune in the kremlin in keeping russia as an align partner is geopolitical. tensions with the united states, on the other hand, rely on western of corporate with western countries. primarily europe not be in technology. so once more sort of china has really a contradiction that it faces and it needs to find a good way on balancing these different interests. we know that beijing has been

for this plan for ending the conflict. is that what she's in being really wants to see? and i wonder, wouldn't it be in his best interest to have a simmering conflict in ukraine to go one for years to distract the u. s. in europe while he takes care of his plans for taiwan? well, frankly, i think that would be the ideal scenario that you've just described. the question to china is really, is russia strong enough to keep the status quo? so it may sound like an easy thing to keep the status quo as it is. but keeping that a war in ukraine in the, in the hang in the balance is in itself a really complicated matter for huge and big. so, and i will all to be quite skeptical sort of this. so he's land. i mean, if you look at the document itself, it's entirely as being

a position to provide the chinese and i think that's really what it is. trying to explain that position in this situation in the situation, the more. but it's not outlining any way to pete. so i don't think it is the piece, but if you know, frankly, it doesn't even claim to be why you and the fact that china has not condemned what russia is doing in eastern ukraine. violating the national sovereignty of another country is that she's in, is that him thinking long term, allowing himself maneuvering room if and when china invades taiwan? absolutely. i think that the huge in pain and china playing this very smartly at this point. they're making clear they stand with the sovereignty sovereign integrity without sort of detailing which borders of ukraine they actually accept as the sovereign borders. so the not really taking sides against russia,

even though sort of signaling that the principle that also serves their own goals, their own interests, is something that they want to keep in up old. so this is sort of really signaling off to the rest of the world. taiwan is ours, and the sovereignty of china can be vitally do we ever reach a point with this war where she's being says, it's now the right thing for us to do when, if we send the lethal weapons to russia to be used in ukraine knowing full well, what that will trigger in terms of sanctions and other problems for him. do you think that i'm going to reach that point? it's not impossible, but unlikely. i think. and i think the main concern from teaching pain and china really is the fall of the of proteins regime in the kremlin. this if your face it,

if i put in would fall, this could either mean a more pro western government, but it could also beat and i will try nationally getting a hole in the kremlin, like, or mr. precaution. and this is all serve a nightmare for china, not least a because they share a very long border with russia and any troubles up there would be very disturbing. 2 pennies as well. the china has very strong interest in protein remaining in the kremlin. and the question is, if he gets really under pressure, what's going to happen all of the going, the chinese going to react back? going to change the caucus at this point, i find it rather unlikely that they are going to send weapons and ammunition, but it's not in a timely impulse. timberly with the german council on foreign relations here in berlin. we appreciate your time tonight and your valuable insights. thank you. thank you so much. ah,

it has been 20 years since american and coalition forces invaded iraq on a mission to topple saddam hussein's dictatorship and to find those weapons of mass destruction within 3 weeks. saddam's regime had fallen, but no star piles of nuclear or chemical or biological weapons were ever found. by the time us troops left in 2011, the insurgency that followed the invasion had claimed the lives of more than a 100000 iraqi civilians. while you west losses had reached nearly 4500. now a semblance of normalcy has returned. but iraq still battles a range of challenges from political instability to poverty and rampant corruption . our next report takes a look at today's iraq shock and awe. the iraq war started with a rush explosion, sliding up back dead on the banks of the t. chris river, by night soon,

us troops were moving into the city and they intend to topple dictator saddam hussein in a very literal way. this is that same square, 20 years later bustling with traffic. modern hotels, in fountains. the city is a far cry from the war torn place that the name backed out evoked after more than a decade after tearing violence that killed tens of thousands. but despite the relative peace of recent years, many are still troubled. one hardly union enough sidwell. currently, the situation is the same, but there is no difference between the current regime and the previous warranty. audible pebble when you want to speak or demand your rights. they confront you with weapons and killing said i hope it's no different from the previous regime in the hub level, global rhythm angle here. well, i want to, you soon,

did iraq got rid of the tyrants? saddam hussein and the country would be in better shape, but it was one tragedy after another saddam has gone. but we got 1000 other saddam saddam o elephant, dumb, but not every one feels despair. and i'm a woman, i know shall whom i li decker. do i have faith that the use of the ones who come up with the idea is the use of the ones who lead the revelations? i like him allow the use of a foundation, and the best proof of that is the protests that happened in 2019. we saw the youth laid the protests on it that gave me and bit of hype. well, had the animal with natalie all back dad still suffers from whites brit poverty, despite iraq's great oil wealth before it was stolen by saddam hussein. now the oil money still does make it into regular people's pockets. a lot of iraq is still the same and nothing has changed to that citizens hoped for something better, but there's no change that i know available. there's no more shock, you know, just

a white bread feeling that things could happen and should have gone much better. yeah, 2 decades ago by quickly we want to take a look back now at the us led invasion of iraq and its effects with middle east analysts. daniel girl like daniel, it's good to see you again. we've talked many times about situation in iraq on post it invasion, 20 years of after the beginning of the invasion. what, what are the geopolitical consequences that we're dealing with today or the to belittle consequences were dramatic. first of all, by invading iraq, of course, america strengthened it's arch enemy iran because iran's run has become a heavy weight in the region for all the records become weaker. right. of course, because saddam hussein was, was the opponent of iran and for that reason was supported by the west for a long time before the fortune turned. israel also became much more powerful

because of course saddam hussein was one of the arch rivals and a threat to israel security interest and the american lead or coalition invasion. we can the arab camp and it led to instability. and at the same time, our lack of modernization, also in the our world, our rulers are dictators where we can, but remain to the status quo for a long time. and i think you can say that the arab spring, almost a decade later happened because there was no change, no reform and promises we're not kept. and that is also one of the consequences, the board terror, but also of the iraq invasion. you haven't mentioned islamic state isis. well, that is a very complicated issue. of course, if you hear that a lot in the region, the american invasion led to the creation of isis, or even the shortcut people were saying the americans created, created isis. i think that is much more complicated. we saw these tendencies of jihad is them and extremism long before. that is still in the stabilisation

disintegration of states and region, which is also a major factor. and i think that is one of the products that eventually led to the creation of the so called islamic state in iraq. the point is the that the war, the invasion itself was, was difficult and it left it devastation. but what happened after the war, the civil war, that this asian entailed was much more destructive. and it led to sectarian strive and that was the ultimate fuel that also led to the creation of the islamic state in which was some sort of a sunday insurrection, against the americans, against the leaders. and so yes, you can say that the creation of i so was also one of the long term consequences of the invasion. what can you see had there been no invasion of iraq there would have been a long stay while that is quite possible. but we don't know. of course that's an academic speculation. we don't know how stable to remove saddam hussein would have

been. we know that he already though he was often like brand at a secular, a powerful leader. he also played with the mobilization few will of islam and especially to the end of his route. he became some sort of an islamist. you can say he was supporting arabic, arab and islamist, and so new sentiment at the same time he was doing like some sort of a nice lamb is ation campaign. and he also supported let's say, so nice terry and ideas. so you can say that the ideology was there before, but of course without the disintegration the downfall of the regime. it's quite hard to imagine that malicious turning into pseudo states like controlling vast areas of lands and iraq, which is like pop up like this. know saddam hussein would certainly control that. we were talking in the newsroom this evening that we were surprised in the united states. there hasn't been a lot of public discussion reporting on the 20th anniversary of this in beijing. we

were surprised by that. or are you and do you, do you have an answer? if someone were to say, why did the americans invade iraq today? it's very difficult from today's perspective. the hindsight to imagine such as such a situation even that a western democratic country would take such a decision. look, i think back then of course, i don't want to go into the psychology of the republican leadership at that time, george w bush. but i think there was at the same time, some sort of an arrogance, but also an optimism that the entire world is just there. after the downfall of the soviet of the soviet union, the entire world is just there to embrace western liberal democracy. and many americans, though they had no real idea what was going on, iraq felt vindicated, right after the downfall of the regime. there was some sort of a treacherous silence and peace. iraq is didn't run, take up arms and fight the american invaders from the very 1st day. of course, there was a time silence

a couple of months where you really were many americans said ok. you see the iraqis want democracy. they were just happy that we, that we out, that saddam hussein and now let's build a new state. and the way that this new state was built wasn't away very naive, but at the same time will be c as a legacy is a deficient democracy, a parliamentary democracy. but if you compare to other states, and by no means i want to justify the american asian, it was an absurd decision. but you see that there is a parliamentary democracy and some iraq is a proud of this of the system though they know is deficient. and what i find most striking is that if you, if you given the fact that the americans created so much devastation in iraq, i cannot say. and i travel the country quite frequently. that, that iraq is a fundamentally american. you find an american sentiment, but not more than, than elsewhere. what is the relationship in the united states? they're still somewhat of a military presence in the region, but do they? yeah. how do you explain that then?

that there is not this greater anti americanism? well, i think there was a lot of cultural influence, especially on the state building process, especially on the political class. and even though the rocky politicians that i have met and i have met many of them personally, many of the big power brokers in the country. they have remained some sort of an on taunt cordial with the americans. they have remained some sort of a relationship with the americans because of course they know about the, about the negative power. they know what america america can do to you, who, if you are not their friend and this is quite well, some people would call it the stockholm syndrome. yeah, i think it's just like very cold. so a calculus of interest, iraq is, have learned how to balance. often we hear that they are, that they are influenced by iran. so some even say that they are a proxy state of iran. that is, that is nonsense. i think they are very well know how to balance the power of america, of iran and of other regional players. but they at the same time, welcome foreigners and even invite sometimes foreign powers to sit at the table and

play a role in the country, which is quite an interesting thing. if it's fascinating. did you feel like, as always, we appreciate your time to see you here in the studio again as well. thank you for so much that the government of fringe president emanuel may crohn has narrowly survived a new confidence motion in parliament. the votes were triggered by opposition parties after the government pushed divisive pension and retirement reforms through without a vote in parliament plans have sport wireless for just across for yes. if you're not or corresponded in paris, lisa louise, at least it's good to see you again. explain why your, why the government it was expected to survive, the no competence vote, even though it could not muster a majority in parliament last week to pass this pension reform bill

because it's 2 different things really, you know, the, the lawmakers that are in the fakers away and the focus of attention were the republican, the conservative floor makers, and that were supposed to vote in favor of the reform. but they not all of them agreed with that and followed their leaders lead really a last thursday. and that's why the government used the special constitutional power. but the government also knew that if they launched this, no confidence or, or if they had this now confidence vote at the stakes would be different for republican lawmakers if they'd then vote against the government. that would have brought down the government and she get snapped parliamentary elections. and in these snap elementary elections, young popular was almost certain to gain ground would have been the, the far right and republican lawmakers wouldn't have been, you know, it couldn't have been secure. and couldn't have been sure to maintain their seat.

wondering why emanuel mccord why he has insisted on sticking by this reform pushing it through, knowing that there's basically almost no support among the french people. i mean, what does he know that apparently the french people don't know. well, this is the one flagship reform. he's been, he was re elected with last year and he feels that he needs to put in place this one big reform, which is the heart of all reform for the mother of all reforms. and to show that he is a strong safe man. he says, we need to maintain a good image on an international level also so that fans can borrow money on international markets for him. it's really a question of leaving a trace in history. and yes, certainly under estimated at the reaction to using this exceptional concentration

of power to push the reform through. because i thought, i think he thought he must have thought that the protest would go away and they're not going away right now. is their lease, is there a chance that these approaches could become even more wide spread perhaps on a scale such as the, the yellow best approach us that we saw a few years ago? absolutely, that's the big question. really, you know, the protests against this specific of form over the past few weeks were organized and very well controlled by the unions. now that's really different to how the yellow, less protests were. there were decentralized, didn't have any leaders and very difficult to control. now everybody's watching this and thinking will these very well organized with a very few clashes, these protests will there turn into some kind of yellow style protest. at tonight we're seeing hundreds of people roaming through paris, protesting. actually, the police and journalists are having difficulties keeping up with them. and it

looks like they're really this protest movement is turning into some kind of gorilla protest movement. at least that's what we've seen over the past few days. and tonight we're very on, lisa lou with the late tonight in parish reporting, all these forms that have gone through and maybe even a very only lloyd, she may have to work an extra 2 years time will fill the so thank you. the day is almost done, the conversation continues a line. you'll find us on twitter, either dw news, you can follow me on twitter at brent golf t v. and remember, whatever happens between now and then tomorrow is another day we'll see you then if

ah, with eco india. how can a country's economy grow in harmony with its people and the environment when there are doers to look at the bigger picture? india, a country that faces many challenges and whose people are striving to create a sustainable future clever projects from europe and india. eco,

india. next on d, w. m, all quiet on the western front. their german anti war film wins no less than 4 oscars. we take a look at how art struggles to survive in hard times. ukrainian artists are fighting against the war in their country and for the preservation of their cultural identity. art 21. in 60 minutes on d. w. o. r, flying rivers created by waterfalls throwing water particles into the air. b, trees,

sweating out up to 1000 liters of water in a day or sea forest fires, evaporating large amounts of moisture tune in to get the answer. learn more about this phenomenon to find out a heavy, invisible river that flows through the sky. starts march 23rd on d, w. ah, ah, with lunch yet a fundamental part of life on earth. whether the rain forests in added regions or in the under water was flanked also essential to life in cities. how can be.