some european countries are on board, but the us remains reluctant to night. the former commander of the us army in europe tells me why that is a mistake. even a cry. i'm for a golf in berlin. this is the day the, you'll know, anyway, operating with a minimum of weapon. the yes, we are grateful. what do we need more or less of us to drive russian forces all our lab. eventually this, this conflict will be decided to go shape. resolve that a goal, she ation tables, press them tooth and must realize bostic tunnel reading on the back and see time is of the essence, especially with winter on its way. the quickest way to end this war is to provide the weapons to ukraine. we must all stuff up our support and quickly

also coming up there, part of modern warfare and espionage, but drones also have a positive role to play in our lives to 9 day report on the good draw. i'm completely blown away, so it's a hypnotizing separately. it's more original and makes more shapes. it's a change for to our viewers watching on p b as in the united states into all of you around the world. welcome. we begin today with the president who will not give up ukraine's president ultimate zalinski has once again urged allies to allow his country to use western weapons to attack deep inside russia. on fridays, the lensky spoke at rum stein airbase, here in germany, where representatives from some 50 countries gathered for talks that were hosted by us defense secretary lloyd austin lensky. later met with german chancellor,

all walk shelves for talks in frankfort. it was the landscape wants to secure more weapons to help his nation push the russian invaders off ukrainian territory. we do want to end this war. we want peace. we want to save our people testable, our country, and it is pushing it with thousands wants peace, and he's a disease with territorial conquests. she wants our see this or the ruins that's remain of them. and that is why we need stress. we need to force russia to seek this. we need to make rush. i see this, and even ross is a soldier. think about what they need. peace or puts him and it is realistic to pause them to choose a piece. if a more i'm joined now by the former commander of the us army here in europe retired

us army, lieutenant general ben hodges, mr. hodges is good to have you back on the program. i will ask you about ukraine. president modem is zalinski. he was present that today's contact media. in fact, that was his 1st in person appearance. at this meeting, i was struck by how much attention this fact is received, especially in the media here in germany, is, should we be reading any thing into this, or is there anything to be read here or yeah, what we should be reading into it is that this is rick's truly important for the survival of ukraine and their ability to win this conflict. and it also, i think, is important that he is able to speak face to face, to people like sector austin and others and convey to them the sense of urgency, of being able to deliver capabilities and on time. i mean, a lot has been promised, but it has not been delivered on time. and so i think his presence helps inject

a little bit more urgency into the process. you bring me to my, my next question or point and zalinski and his address to day think members of the contact group as he always does. he then said, basically, i'm, you know, paraphrasing here, you promised more weapons. there's weapons and still haven't arrived. is there any reason to think that's that that's going to change as well? so i would, i would expect that there will be a jolt of energy into the system after today would present your landscape personal appeal. but i have to say that the united states, the u. k. in germany, a while we have provided collectively have provided a live. we have been dragging our feet there has not been the sense of urgency needed to make sure that ukraine has. busy the to actually do feed russia and to

defend them. so there is not that sense of urgency. well there's a. busy top lots been provided, but it's not being done in a way that conveys that we all are concerned that they might actually lose. and i think that's, that's our fault, ross. i think it's a reflection on the fact that the us administration, the german government, the british government, have not committed to actually helping ukraine windows complex. and in fact, they don't, we don't even say what our objective is only nonsense, like we're with you for as long as it takes, which means nothing. systems for ukraine. yeah, that is something i think people on both sides of the atlantic a wondering how much longer will allies be committed to this more mean the, the german for the defense minister today said that weapons and funding are secure for ukraine will into the year 2026,

and so are we talking about another 2 years of this war to well, again, it goes back to the political responsibility of our elected officials, whether it's the american president or the german bonus counsellor. they have to clearly identify the strategic objective. now, i believe, and many others believe that the objective should be to help you kind actually defeat russia is to our strategic advantage. the russia is forced to back to the 1991 borders and to live within their own borders. not only because of the stability and security of europe, but the chinese are watching also when, if, if they see that we in the west are not willing and able to defend things like sovereignty and international agreements in europe. they will not be too impressed with anything that we say about sovereignty, freedom of navigation, etc, in the endo pacific region. so this is about

a lot more than just ukraine. now. busy if the president listed under scouts, it would say no, we, we want you kind of weird and we're going to do everything necessary to help them when this, this'll be over this year. it could've been over the last year. but if we continue to drive along, like we are now, are eastern european allies, the baltic countries, poland, finland, romania, others like that. they're going to be there going to, they are not going to slow down because they know the price of these value. now when you say being committed to winning this more, are you meaning that there should be a green light given for ukraine to use western weapons to attacked even deeper inside russia? because you know, the lens. he asked for that permission today, and he did not get it a yeah, this, this is a, i think,

a criminal negligence on our part criminal negligence. i don't know how many more times we have to watch russian muscles and slam into apartment buildings and school yards and shopping centers, killing kids and innocent people. and yeah, we don't allow ukraine to shoot at the places from which these attacks are originating. or it makes no so there's no legal, mary, or operational reason to deny them the ability to do that. and the russians of course, can see that we are limiting ukraine's ability to do that. so they're going to continue doing this like certainly don't have any more compunction about killing innocent people this not gonna stop until they are stopped. and i don't want to here are our administration or the german government, or anybody talk about that. our prayers with the poor people of ukraine. we're not actually doing anything protects them from what russia is doing. but, you know, there are more european allies see or, or coming out publicly and saying, yes,

we support ukraine using this weapons to hit deeper inside of russia. it's the united states that remains reluctant to change its policy. so primarily the united states, us. right. and this is where, despite all the good things to present a bite and his administration of done, this is an absolute failure of leadership, of to be decisive and helping ukraine weird because it benefits all of us this, this is not some charity thing for our friends and ukraine, this is about stability and security in europe, which affects american security, american prosperity as well. now look, german use this over nation. so germany cannot hide behind the united states, just because my president has failed here. germany has lots of capability. things that they could be doing more, and i think that they are using american reluctance as an excuse the u. k. same thing. so these are sovereign nations. the need to understand the me, jeremy,

will be one of the biggest loser. 16 crime fails, which, which means millions more ukrainian, refugees coming into central and western europe. continue disruption of brain and energy shipments, which affects prices for all of us. so i think that germany and u. k. could add more to certain more decisiveness, even if the united states fails. well, i'm a started is what would you say then to those european allies who hear us lawmakers arguing that ukraine is, is far away from the you with this is a european problem. it's not a trans atlantic problem, the europeans need to deal with this as well. these are not essential of each other . europeans need, of course, need to be dealing with this. whether or not the united states does, provides the necessary leadership and support. because this is about more than just ukraine. americans rightly asked, why should we do this, what, what,

what is ukraine matter? and i would say it matters to the united states because our prosperity in the united states is tied directly to europe prosperity. our biggest trading partner is europe. so. busy if you've got conflict in millions of refugees and disruption of food and energy in europe, that has a direct impact on our economy. so there's economic reason why matters. then of course, most americans would say, yeah, but the bigger threat is china. absolutely. which is another reason why we should help ukraine to feed russia is as part of deterring china for making the same terrible miscalculation that russia has made. and if you want a product for the conflict, we're nato was involved, which means american soldiers, german. so the british soldiers that we need to help you cry and defeat russia and ukraine. i want to price you on the buying administration not being, you know, fully committed to allowing ukraine to, to win this for. is there any reason to think that

a comma la harris administration would be any different from joe biden? we know what a donald trump a 2nd donald trump administration would be like. so for the ukrainians, regardless of what happens on election day in the us in november, post election does not look very good for them in terms of increasing us support for the ukrainian f. i'm not, i'm not prepared to to agree with that. i would expect that a harrison ministration would be at least as supportive as the by the ministration and the indicators i'm seeing her that it would be more decisive. i think that a present button and people around him are seized with an excess of fear that russia might escalate. but nobody else believes that russia will actually escalator using nuclear weapon. and i think the administration also has an excessive tier of

what happens if ukraine is so successful that the printer machine might collapse. i don't think they will, but that's not something that we should be scared of anyway. i mean, the soviet union collapsed back and everything turned out pretty good and we were not even surprised for so are we were not prepared for, excuse me. so i would anticipate a present harris, who by the way, is already we already know that she's going to have a whole different national security team. different defense secretary, different foreign secretary. so i think she would be much better for us europe, transatlantic relationship for nato. and for ukraine, we don't know what a truck administration would be like, except that we know he has never, ever, in the last 10 years criticize putting ever, and he's criticizes nato and his and criticizes in germany frequently. so i think

the course here at the new plan is, will have to live wherever the american people elect discharge. before you run out of time, i just wanna be clear about this. are you saying that a kamala harris with in november is key now to ukraine? be able to defeat russia of what's key you helping ukraine defeat russia is making sure that ukraine has all the capabilities they need to push rusher back to the 1991 border. pat means long range, precision weapons, that means enough air and missile defense. so that they can protect their civilian infrastructure and their people and getting out of the way ukraine has no interest in permanently occupying any part of russia. they just want russia to live inside its own borders, which is what, presumably all of this war, i mean, we always talk about the international rules based order. the un charter, that means respect for sovereignty,

respect for international law. this is your best interest. and so what's key is all of us helping you frame achieve their been hodges is always the dogs. we appreciate your time and your valuable analysis tonight. thank you. i appreciate the opportunity you guys gave me the next v lingering fear. the warranty crane could evolve into a nuclear conflict. ahead of the gathering. and rom stein there was speculation to us would give the go ahead this in long range missiles to ukraine. of this week or rush is foreign minister. second elaborate issued a warning to the west. they should understand. they are joking about our red lines here. they shouldn't joke about our red lines coming from a nuclear power. that sounds like russia would be prepared to using nuclear weapon . right? for the beginning of brushes, war is president fulton has a warranty,

the west not to defy his ambitions in ukraine, but washington in his allies, increased the military aid to ukraine. also this week the kremlin said that it's revising it's nuclear dr. and now it's believed that could mean a lowering of the threshold for the use of nuclear weapons and a new russian weapon. his grab the attention of the analyst at cna, the center for naval analyses. that's a non profit research and analysis organization based in washington dc. i'm happy to welcome to the program tonight, decker, evelyn decker. good to see you. what makes you so sure that site could be used to watch the sky full. so the facility that we're looking at has a number of what we call signatures and image or analysis and things that are unique to that site that we use to determine the specific features of,

of what that could be used for this particular facility is unlike any other nuclear weapons deployment site in russia. not only does it have facilities for the maintenance of missiles, but it has nuclear warhead facilities. and then it has a couple of very peculiar launch positions. there are 9 launch positions on the bottom left side of the image. and what we've noticed about this last piece is that unlike other russian loc decisions they are situated in the very particular direction. and they're also bumped, which means you have a large mirror, it's a rampart around the, the launch position. and that says to us that this would be used for a fixed visit system. and because of the directionality of the launch sites, you're looking at likely a cruise missile of the sky. for me, it sounds scary when you have read about it on paper, but is it really

a game changer on the battlefield? i'm not really the sky fall system doesn't really give russia any capability. they don't already have. they have cheaper nuclear systems for targeting europe. and they have icbm, as we're targeting the united states, the most generous argument i could make about why they're investing in this system is to defeat us the national missile defense systems, in order to confidently strike a series of targets united states. but even that is not credible just to ation for the system. and we in the field of, you know, russian nuclear studies have been having a lot of arguments, but particularly why they've decided to invest here with a flying nuclear reactor. i mean, it doesn't sound very safe to me. one analyst called it

a you meekly stupid weapon or even a flying turnover. i mean, what's your take on that? so you know, it's an honest you'll nuclear reactor, which means that you're generating some other radiation as it flies along. um, the other problem is that of course, if it were to crash in an accident like this all happened in 2019, i think you are leaving a very dangerous object that could scatter highly rack material around the launch it back to the point um or at the bottom of the ocean. but we don't necessarily know exactly how much radiation it could generate. well, it's flying along. i think the more concerning part is you have is a situation which if there is to be an accident, or if this missile were to be launch and then go, you know, off course during a test or maybe even a situation which rush of things to can signal with the system, you've got a flying nuclear reactor that's going to land, god knows where we could,

the united states couldn't take up the challenge of making this kind of weapon save to meet or are we seeing the start? yeah, of a new arms raised with the wet um i think that this suite of systems is meant to be very scary. but be perhaps a low investment, but a alternative to a cumulative arms race. that's very generous assessment of the problem. so yes. what about races? nuclear dr. the kremlin says that it's thinking about altering it. if you could explain what the doctrine is at the moment and what a change could mean. i mean, the russian nuclear doctrine, at the most basic level, is they reserved the right to us to grow up. and when the fundamental interest of

the state are at risk of that has been usually interpreted to means and sort of existential threats to the russian states. like, for example, in a high intensity board, nato, and i think they are reevaluating that. and you can look at a lot of the russian critic thinkers have been entertaining, more alarming and more broad use cases for their nuclear arsenal. and that includes a bigger emphasis on possibly for strikes. digger, this is a fascinating topic. we appreciate you taking your time on friday to talk with this decker. evelyn, thank you. no problem. a time. when you think of drones, you probably think of weapons and more, but drones can wind up the sky for very different and much more positive reasons.

we have this report now on the good draw bright lights transpose, the skies of, of pullman's capital. this drawing display makeing a to use since the goal. so uprising, modern technology, helping shift the city's history to get out. yeah. this game, this drain, done so see tub. it was colorful color, someone who doesn't know what happened a to years ago. we'd be able to discover it in the sky. move was a budget to many of them. how's it? i'm leaving the cards to somebody to go to those pictures were huge. the videos on the internet don't capture the effects we sold today. in france, crowds equally impressed by dancing drones in leo

i'm completely blown away. it's a hypnotizing separately, it's more original and makes more shapes. it's a change drawn shows up on the rise with fireworks displays losing some of the lost due to the environmental impacts. and the stress they cause to animals and to wild life for a secret cause of out shows don't generate particular matter. we can put away equipment to generate no pollution. secondly, there is no noise pollution. you can hear the drones, but it's no louder than my voice when we say that's been soaking up. the preparation for the shows must be meticulous. music and animation must be perfectly synchronized. well, okay, back to be able to assign each 3 d artist a specific same model it in volume, then animations and color it. now i've alternates the very 1st sized audio visual

synchronization to create the thrills and the motion. if one of the most for creating a show without spock, but with plenty of shine for those watching, see the good drones the day continues online, you'll find this on the x also known as twitter. and on youtube dw, do is you can follow me on social media and bring golf tv and remember whatever happens between now and then tomorrow is another day, have a good weekend, different the,

the india how is climate change impacting farmers? radio d, j bar. so rank one listens to their stories. tommy, it's good or open in the o, b o and have to come together for climate change. the problem is, it's about dying, the work as a connective and speeding whatever we can for our future generation. eco india.

next on d w, but we'll tell you who we are happy that we are back to the story. we have a getting a visa is more difficult than finding gold hosted to use the dream force and for the future in the stories and issues that are being discussed across the country. news africa. in 60 minutes on d w. the think the forward is twice think ahead or with outside the box on your but always remember

to sing for yourself. we all had to sign was incredibly like providing you with free information dw, made for mind the global warming and climate change, our political and ethical issues that issues of the rights of equality and of hello and welcome. i'm sorry that got the body and you all watching he going there. what is accelerating human and deal with climate change? i'm making extreme that events more frequent,

unintended who is generating the slanted warming emissions.