the joy and click the ukraine wants to use long range weapons to ward off attacks from russian territory . it's western allies are divided on whether that's a risk worth taking. ukraine's president is pushing to use long range missiles like british storm shadows, or american attackers to target air bases and large sites in russia. the western allies are hesitating in the face of stark warnings from moscow. and meanwhile, russia is again, gaining ground intern. yes. and the course called last. so we are asking long range weapons for ukraine pollutants, red line, the

hello and welcome to to the point. it is a pleasure to greet our guests. morris. got smart. got mine reports from ukraine for the german news magazine, stern. nicko le is a senior fellow at the munich security conferences site event initiative. and it's a pleasure to welcome alexander burley croft. he is a professor of international relations and researcher at the german east electronic university. and more it's, we're 2 years into this war, and there is no end in sight. at this point, russia is stepping up. it's a tax on ukraine's electricity grid on utilities. winter is drawing near presidents. lensky has long range weapons in his arsenal. thanks to the us and the

ok, why can't he simply use them in self defense, to pre owned the russian attacks? well, basically because the west has to allow him to do so. so far, these weapons, they are still a, okay, they are in the arsenal of ukrainians. but the in order to use them, ukraine has to somehow cooperate with its west and partners. and as long as the bite them especially bite and it doesn't allow to use them against targets inside russia and ukraine. cons do so present in 5 nicko in fact met with the u. k prime minister and kissed alma and uh, nonetheless, they discussed this issue, but no decision was announced. it seems that item is possibly more hesitant than star. did the, the hesitation surprised you, when does it play into rushes hands?

it doesn't surprise me. i think that is the politic so unfortunately, that's the policy of the vitals from the very beginning. i think buying this whole thing to british back, they want to be more forward leaning on this. some other partners like the french benevolence of denmark, do you have lifted all restrictions already do not even talking about it, but very much depends on the white house. no way i have to feeling to the mindset some 2 and a half years ago is still on changed. but the law has changed very much. and i think there should be decisions taken to allow ukraine to target by themselves and to bring more precision weapons that can be used for deep strikes into ukraine. so it's not only about restrictions, i think it's also about following to move deliveries just briefly to buy this hesitancy, as i understand it by and can actually stop the ukraine, u. k, u, the u. k. from granting permission. because storm shadows contains some us parts.

is that right? i think that is what already happened. alexander, russian president vladimir putin has been doing a lot of saber rattling over the past 2 and a half years. this is now no exception. he is a once again, making threats. how seriously should ukraine and its partners take those threats? i think of seriously distress should be taken depends who you are in the alliance. to pick up on the point about the white house. this is that unique situation compared to the ukraine, 010 partners. many ways the us as a global power level interest in the conflict in the middle east is one where russia is not only possible, but very likely to respond the symmetrically to lifting these restrictions. and we already know that the russians considered supplying difficulties with advanced long range missiles of their own. and this is exactly the kind of escalation that we could expect to see should restrictions be lifted by the white house. and i want to

drill deeper on that point and what retaliation might look like the forest. let's take a closer look at what ukraine wants and what its partners are willing to allow. it's about missile systems like these british storm shadows for american attack. them shorter range versions are already being used by ukraine, but the ukranian president is again increasing pressure on nato partners to supply longer range missile systems. the aim to take out command centers and airports in the russian hinterland, county and show participate as well prolonging the process of lifting long range restrictions. the school will lead russia to move these targets further inland. dom we're therefore, when the restrictions are lifted, it should be about ukraine's victory. not just a political strategy it, but i'm a little green there on the beach and i study the release of western long range

weapons. it's an absolute no go for the russian president. his threats are accordingly placement. that would be a direct intervention in the war shoes, and it would fundamentally change the conflict. it would mean that nato countries and the usa, our war with russia. why do you, how important are western long range weapons for ukraine? and let me put that question right to more it's would allowing ukraine to use these long range weapons. for the purposes it's switching. would that actually make a decisive difference? is it a game changer? i would say that it could have been a game changer. uh, 12 months ago, but again, we're seeing that it's taking too long. our discussions in the west are taking too

long. and this gives the russians that opportunity, for example, to move away from the border or from the zone of risk to move away its 2 other fields uh, their wall plains that could have been hits with these weapons munition depos uh whatever. so um, actually the moment of surprise is over. and even if the west gave the permission now, it, it wouldn't have a decides if a moment in staying with the question on game changers. ukrainian drone recently destroyed quite a large, a weapon depot in the russian area. of their or could you create and use it's home made weapons, it's own drones to achieve the kind of cross border attacks into russian territory that it says it needs long, long range missiles to do ukrainians codes. and we see that they are doing this,

and especially the cases you're talking about. it's amazing because a tree, it is really very far away from the clean and border. it's even further north than the moscow at so it's amazing what they doing with their self made drones am, but it's much harder to hit with these drones, for example, air fields deep interrupted because the, the, the explosive power of these small drones, it's not as big as a storm shadow or a tech comes, has it. so you may hit one plane or the other, but you can't do certain things with these kinds of drones. you go for a good year and a half, at least a critics have been saying, western aid is coming too late, too little to piece meal. and that what we really need is a big bag. a lot of

a delivered at one time where it's also inside the same. would you agree with that? would you say this piece, meal approach is simply prolonging the war and the suffering or do you think western allies are right to be cautious? i think the strategy that was driven by the white house may need to deny russia and keeping it some more ins worked, put into it, not as chief as war ams for more than 2 and a half years. but the strategy we are in now is the longest possible and most expensive way of handling this. it will be much more expensive for all of us if you continue on that path. so i wouldn't have called at the big bang, but uh, existing ukraine with what we would use our selves to solve the military tasks to put russia under pressure on the territory. if you created and lifting the restrictions of weapons, we would also not restrict ourselves if we would have to fight this fight. that was,

i think, change the situation. and to do it faster, is a faster way to put russia under pressure to come to the negotiation table dripping help in and then hoping for this to somehow solve itself. i think it's not a very good strategy. alex, in his final interview before leaving office, the nato gen a secretary general. i young sheldon had said that he acknowledges that would be a risk to allowing ukraine to use these long range missiles. on the other hand, he said, the greatest risk that we face is that poor 2 wins this war. would you agree with that? i think that this assessment is broadly speaking, correct? for european security. also for global security at the end of the day. and i've written about this a russian victory by this word, if it was as it were, with normalize and you status quoting international relations. so beyond implications for our own security, this would in bold and similar actions by other countries that want to change the

status quo and that oppose the rules. the rules based international order. if i'm a advocate ukrainians are in the quite desperate situation at the moment. as you mentioned, these attacks on the energy infrastructure will bring a very tough winter for the greens, the toughest window of the wall. over the last 2 and a half years. and on the conventional level, on the front in the dawn bus at the green is our number. i want to come back. yeah . to 6. right. so i think so basically the west, if it ones the want to end at it must allow the gradients to put some kind of pressure on to team to bring him to the negotiation table. and they can put the pressure on, put in on the front end of the on bus. and because they have not enough people. and they can do this on several other levels. so this level of the, of the

a long range missiles could be one measure where, how they could put more pressure on russia. one measure how to emphasize more. so let's talk a little bit about the weather and how western allies could mitigate the risk if they were to proceed with approval for use of long range weapons perhaps separately, rather than jointly in his remarks. and the report that we just saw putting appears to assume that the nato allies would act in concert nicko. but in fact, in stoughton bank, who has just ended his term in office, the secretary general of nato said, no, it will be up to the individual countries. do you think that that would make a difference in put in calculations or is it perhaps to find a legalistic point, to bridges over the same roof on costco, blossoming, destroyed with french black bones differential not even discussing this at all. i think this is the right approach. the question is why are the us and

u. k. i discussing this ult into public and i agree with what lot of set speed is of the essence here and, and resolve with the costco offensive. i think the ukranian demonstrated it to all of us, that 14 interest system to have huge problem with surprising events, with things that happened fast. but they are very good if we are acting slow, they are very good in adapting and reacting to it. so putting, putting on his heels and having the initiative on our side, i think that is what we are looking into. ukrainians have show that this makes the difference. how divided are the western allies in your view? we've heard a chance. the schultz here in germany saying under no circumstances will he provide a towers cruise missiles, longer, longer range missiles for ukraine's use. we have biden hesitating, although he has said a ukraine must win. and then as you say, we have france going ahead. are the allies actually more divided now than in the past? no, i would ask the question,

are those arguments you mentioned that they connected to the media terrace situation in ukraine? because i think they are, and it's about their elections in the us. it's about the expedited being under pressure of on demand as of august. as also it's amazing, left leaning laurie do have more discussion and the more they are influenced by domestic nitty gritty and are away from the military situation in ukraine. and of course, put in with hybrids, welfare has instruments to even take part in the domestic discussions to undermine a quick response. i think that is what we're seeing here. the best way is not to talk about it and not to have discussions and trust, deliver, and to let the ukrainians decides what and how they do it. alex, would you agree with that point? and in your view, how is putting, calculating this risk? would it make a difference if countries simply move to had just the friendship done rather than debate at long legs, whether it's ok to give permission?

so i would strongly agree with people that this is essentially driven by domestic political costs of durations. and i think that that also means that when we look at putting statements, they are part of this hybrid response because they are meant to elicit a certain year of, of this, of these measures in europe. this in particular, and not so much in the united states, but certainly in continental europe. and i think it's worth remembering that the public facing statements of the kremlin and what the russian military would actually do. and the russian security services in terms of responding to this are very different and they're kind of escalation that is likely to come, for example, of sabotage, more hybrid warfare escalation in other theaters, as i mentioned in the middle east, is likely to come anyway in the near future because of the necessity for to put in we seem to actually win the war. and this is part of this fed with, regardless of what we do hanging over this war. since its inception has been the

democrats sort of a possible nuclear event. the use of a tactical nuclear weapon by russia, for example, is that something that would be on your list of possible retaliatory tactics that he would use? absolutely not. russian nuclear doctrine is very clear under what circumstances this would happen. it's very clear about the bladder of escalation and how it would proceed. and essentially, if the, if one assess, is it realistically the only circumstance under which the russians would consider to use a nuclear weapon? it would be if the territorial integrity of the russian federation and sir, it's very much what they mean by that crime. yep. potentially the rest of ukraine, clearly not. so if the theory tote and integrity and more importantly than that regime stability and regime survival were seriously threatening, which is not a scenario that we are likely to see in this conflict. but the talking about

territorial integrity, i mean the, the ukrainian incursion into the cost region isn't this the case of a so that's exactly where we're going next. but had, i'll explain the way the way that they think about it is not that of a threat to territory temporary, but went through the order of integrity, becomes compromised in a way that cannot be salvage by conventional military forces. the russian assessment, of course, is that it can be contained with the forces available to the russian military. and therefore this does not actually compromise irreversibly. russian territory, those type therefore, if i ground source going in, there is a cost calculation on nuclear weapons as well. i think in germany debate is very image of it because nuclear weapons under stuart like an end of the world. but. but i think in the russian understanding of the use of the, of nuclear weapon to is a day after. and is a discussion on what this would mean and it makes it for rush,

i think highly irrational to respond that way. absolutely. let's come back to the incursion into, into a course. and this, in fact, is quite a different type of cross border attack that ukraine launched in august when it sent troops into rushes course region in an attempt to halt and divert moscow's forces. an embarrassing surprise for moscow, but it's counter offensive is now exacting hi tool. these images are sent to show russian military in the course region. russia claims to have recaptured several villages. a month after the surprise invasion by ukrainian troops. the counter offensive is under way. there was talk of fierce fighting but the russian army also appears to be advancing further on the front and donuts. albeit slowly,

many civilians had to flee the particularly contested area around the poconos. the premium defenders are under pressure. contrary to keeps hope, russian units were not withdrawn on mass from donuts and re deployed at course, with a possible russian re conquests of the region. the idea of forcing russia to exchange territory is also threatening to fail. fighting, in course, on the defensive in don't ask, did ukraine miscalculate mark, what would you say to that? was the crust incursion, a miscalculation and what effects did it have that are positive for you? create morale, boosting perhaps the i think it's too early to assess. finally, the but you're right, it's boosted the morales of the ukrainians and show to the greens and also to the west apartments that ukraine can surprise the russians and can take the territory

from the russians. and but it so far it didn't reach the main aim. the main goal, which was to draw forces away from the bus, the region, russian forces. and the russians are countering the ukraine and offensive and cost region. they have stopped it. and, but without using forces from the don't boss and into the just about done by the region, ukrainians are very much under pressure. alex, clearly this is not the major territorial invasion that you meant a moment ago. nonetheless, in fact, russia was forced to re settle refugees who left some of the towns that had been captured by ukrainian forces. and it did declare a state of emergency in the region. what will that have meant to russian morales? i think that just like the counter offensive last year, what it needs to russian morale has to do with how dependent proceeds. and it must

be said that the 1st 2 days of the incursion were very successful for ukraine, with the penetration is by most of our groups. but the russians mobilized quickly, ended contains the advanced, so you're training forces. and so the morales diff for directions was therefore essentially prevented by the relatively swift containment and the offensive. and you go beyond the course campaign, how precarious is the situation in ukraine? overall reporters on the eastern front say that the ukrainian forces there and badly outgunned outmanned and definitely demoralized. but we say one sentence about cost for us. i think they are observing very modern welfare understanding here buddies, ukrainians, because it's a kinetic action that supports the information operation. and to information operation is necessary to have a political discussion. and we always tend to have a tendency and thinking the other way around. but i think that's an actually

a super modern approach by the ukrainians, and it will have an effect on all the discussions we are having at the same time in doing boss nipple cost. and i have been there several times. people fighting down the trenches. i bought my age so they're in the end of their forty's, the on demand stair, they have 20 percent off the units on the field with people. and it's a very tough decision about ukrainian military leadership to say, look, we use the resources to go into course. but at the same time, we know that as a different, different difficult situation in full cost. but we will see later if this was a good decision to put the resources that way, i think we would see now increasing the also for russia, that russia has a dilemma and deciding whether resources go and that russia did not put troops from one bus into cause of lust yet does not mean it's not going to happen. i think we will have to observe this over the next months. none the less russian resources are

pretty impressive since russia put its economy on a war footing. alex, you recently did a study together with other researchers for germany's renowned to institute of the world economy and basically showed findings that moscow in 6 months could produce as many weapons as germany has in its entire arsenal, does not spelled disaster for ukraine. so is just to be clear, our findings are relatively consistent with other estimates from the united states, from the utah and so on. so it's not that they are revolutionary in some truly dramatic way. aside from the comparisons that we make to, to the gentleman context, but they do come with several let's say qualifiers, this surgeon russian production is very significant and it needs that rush, it can remain calm a defective. and it means that russia can retain initiative and continue defensive in the don't boss. and i think it's worth mentioning that negotiations should they

ever happen, would only realistically happen the moment that the kremlin assess is that it's offensive power expense until then the kremlin will not negotiate. however, candace last indefinitely that i don't think so because very quick answer. if you would, the german chancellor has recently called again for a stronger diplomatic push to and the war. when is the right time for political talks? is it now? i think the right time to start printing of talk should be paired with the very concrete. uh, uh, plans uh to supply ukraine with the weapons. because only then can you ukraine go to the negotiation table from a rather strong position at the moment the position of your grain is quite bad. so it's not the right time at this moment. alex donald trump says he could end the war

in 24 hours and if he were re elected, what would that look like to crane lose this? i think donald trump says a lot of things and i think whatever he says that these rallies will be moderated by the american national security, their occupancy and would come to that much more, let's say, realistic outcome that's an entire discussion in itself. very quick. last question . to all of you, long range weapons for ukraine, put in his red line. that was our question. should the west to give permission to take a different mission and deliver more expand to deliveries? that's a way to peace, alex, it's something that has to be done. well, it did game changer unlikely, but that doesn't mean it doesn't have to be done. what i think uh the west should do this, but small them desk that should be a key strategy. thank you to all of you for being with us. thanks to our viewers for tutoring and check out our youtube channel. tell us what you think. see. so the,

the, the

happy go lucky guy on the outside, but still holding just by childhood trauma, on the inside. the same is a victim of sexual abuse. that's a boo subject. and this whole country of a wrong ask what, almost as honest channel goes a stomach, i mean, she takes the brave step to speak his truth. can i hug you in 15 minutes on the w. freedom find russian sessions cushioning, cuz i was in jail for 2 years because the days have criticized the russian

institute. we measure in southern germany. what was it not contain? and why was she eventually released the focus in 19 minutes on d. w, the, the dentist house i mean the for a station in the rain forest continue carbon dioxide emissions, passwords and again the people of the world are we? what impact the biggest change doesn't happen the

make up your own mind? may i try several times. i went on 6 times to greece, is what i have to spend life from 500 to 600. currently, more people than ever on the move world wide and such of address in life. you know, is a very difficult journey. and one is verify. everything . audio stuff. find out about some on storage, info, migrant, reliable news for migrating the

. this is dw news line from berlin as well as leaders says their red lines have been crossed and promises retaliation. for us on this for all of lanes is the real for the mass, the bombing of devices and levels on and serial. call into the quote, mastercard, this is as both has the line is real launch refresh across the border attacks. also coming up from the program, people in poland, clean up and show up their flag defenses. they are unit has promised 10000000000 nero's and recovery funds in the wake of severe flooding across central and eastern europe.