receipt and trade funding are peacekeepers truly the magic medicine for today's numerous wars was the limit of what the bulimics could do to ensure guns fall silent and what else is needed besides you in flag to bring peace to where you are is reaching. out to you and no welcome to the show it's good to have you on our program one more time so both russia and ukraine have recently called for peacekeeping deployments in ukraine's conflict zone and the russians have proposed deployment mostly on the frontline between rebels and the government while of once it on the russian ukraine border is terror compromise to see working here or is it going to take another normal and is still negotiation around to work out a plan to everybody's liking well i think it's good that both ukraine and russia. are now supporting the concept of a peacekeeping mission in ukraine i think it really opens a space for diplomacy and for full compromise i think it will be important to have

international oversight over the areas which are presently in conflict this is a conflict that cannot be forgotten there are people who die every day so i would think peacekeeping would be a very good thing for you for ukraine but what do you think it's going to take to actually come to a compromise where all parties agree on and are happy. well i think it's a combination of things it's important that the. shooting on the frontline stops and so there are a number of confidence building measures that could be taken in terms of less military presence now from the standpoint they will be keen to see that there is more control over the border between russia and ukraine and so i think the compromise probably is that they won't be a fool solution or

a resolution of the issue of the ukraine russia border immediately but they would be a path that leads there and in the meantime in the in the. last measures that limit the presence of the military and possibly measures on the on the other side of the front line since the main ski agreements right america road map to and the ukrainian conflict do not envision road mending peacekeeping force in ukraine russia's foreign minister love role of said that was a close proposal limits the blue helmets role to protecting they say mission only what is ukraine insists on a broad mandate of peacekeeping forces if that were widely the minsk agreement. well i think you know the protection. of the the money to it's essential so that they can do their job and that everybody agrees on

the facts but it's it's an open ended process without and inside if they are not broad measures and so i think there is some merit in the ukrainian position to want something more than just protection and so that's what negotiation and diplomacy in the security council. is for and is useful for this will be a long list of tasks that the ukrainian side will put forward there will be a short is put put forward by the russian side and i think with clever diplomacy one can find cream and suggest they like the minsk treaty become something symbolic when it comes to negotiating peacekeeping forces. well i think the format is important i think in any peacekeeping operation you need to have

a political process otherwise there is a risk that the peacekeeping mission is mean without any end and so the middle means process provides for that but i think we have to focus on what's happening on the ground and that's why i think a peacekeeping mission would be very useful because at the moment we see people dying and there's always a risk of escalation that could get out of hand and nobody wants that for european security so the russians proposed that any peacekeeping mission be negotiated with the separatist forces he is refusing to do that how do you think a peacekeeping mission is supposed to work if you create one talk with the breakaway republics directly the position of the ukrainian government is understandable because the ukrainian government has. to protect the sovereignty of ukraine over the entirety of its territory at the same time you need some practical

niggas ations with those who have guns and these are the yes people there. and the leadership of the movements in. donetsk they are examples where that has worked. when you look at recent success story of the united nations that is colombia and very far from ukraine i think in the case ukraine one has to make clear that there is the sovereignty of ukraine and that this is not a step forward breaking up ukraine i think nobody wants that i think would be bad for european security but at the same time one has to have practical arrangements with those who can. create. potential problems in the area and who we have to be part of the solution so will the peacekeeping force on the frontline

actually make the sites finally pull their heavy guns away because right now both sides agree on doing that but nobody is really moving away yes well i think that's where peacekeeping mission then observers can help a lot because they can they can vary from they can establish facts. uncontroversial manna and agreeing on the facts is always the beginning of a solution if you don't even agree on what the situation is you are likely to agree on how to repair it. now former u.s. ambassador to you to the united nations as well as your case x. prime minister david cameron believe that u.n. peacekeeping mission want to help solve the conflict but actually will just freeze it. and if you look at for instance northern cyprus it's recognize only by turkey it has been existing for half a century like that do you think the same thing could happen to you crane. there's

always a risk of that there are a few missions that have been. deployed for years without solution you mentioned cyprus one could mention western sahara i think that is something to be to be avoided but i prefer. a cold conflict than a hot war and so i think for the people in ukraine who are suffering from the conflict having a deescalation of violence would be a net benefit i think at the moment there are deep divisions in europe in the understanding of what european security should be and so i think the fundamental resolution of the conflict is probably in the immediate future very hard to to achieve but in the meantime making a difference in the lives of the poor people were affected by the conflict i think

that's worthwhile and i think it's also a contribution to overall security of europe because these conflicts messy and complicated can be the match that lights a much bigger conflict i think in europe there is really a need to to address those conflicts which again are not so frozen. dangerous and peacekeeping mission can be part of the solution it can only be a part of the solution but if it can be an important part of it paramilitary battalions in ukraine have stated that they are not going to stop fighting even if a peacekeeping force is deployed so this situation what well they blue helmets be able to do engage in open warfare. no blue helmets are not meant to engage in open warfare i think in ukraine if there is a meeting of the minds of russia and the key west powers there

is a possibility to influence local act and to have a genuine. stop in the violence but i think in ukraine and in many other places you want external powers to help deescalate the violence rather than increase it but if necessary can the un grant the blue helmets a mandate to use force. well the u.n. is not can use force in self-defense but frankly jus political situation like the situation in ukraine you're not going to have peace and forstmann this is not. politically realistic it will not happen so you need to have the political conditions the political understanding between the key actors of moscow. western powers you need to have that

understanding on past the escalation to then have money and peacekeepers who can ensure a measure of safety what peacekeepers can do is that when you look at the situation in ukraine in eastern ukraine you have also in the in the authorities in the de facto authorities. in eastern ukraine you have a lot of criminality and so having. having a force that can stop that criminality that's a net benefit and that's the peacekeepers can do what they cannot do is change the geopolitical facts so you have been doing peacekeeping in the united nations for most of the two thousand now in your experience what kind of a peacekeeping model could work in a strong ukraine if it were completely up to you. well i think it's

more a peacekeeping muddle along the lines of when you mention cyprus and it's it's a good in a bad example it's a bad example for the reasons you stated that it hasn't. is not yet a solution a political solution to cyprus it's a good example in the sense that today in cyprus there is no there is no. islands. so it should be a bit like that i think what is unique in ukraine is a combination of politics and crime which we are going we beginning to see in the number of conflicts and they're not many peacekeeping missions that are deployed in that in that context and so i think they're. that's why you need a slightly more robust mission then you would have in a traditional peacekeeping operation but i don't think. war fighting capacity would

be a realistic option or i wouldn't take a short break right now and while we're back we'll continue talking about u.n. peacekeeping missions around the globe and the challenges they face stay with us.

here's what people have been saying about rejected a night with you i was actually just full on awesome the only show i go out of my way to launch you know what it was a really packed a punch to sleep yeah it is the john oliver of r t america is doing the same we are apparently better than blue. and see people you've never heard of love redacted tonight president of the world bank so take. me seriously send us an e-mail.

with manufacture consent to public wealth. plus a sum protect themselves. with the flaming. lips . we can all middle of the room sick. now we're back with it john madigan no former head of u.n. peacekeeping operations and director of the international crisis group discussing the un peacekeeping missions u.n.

peacekeepers have a mixed record successes often mixed with failure sometimes in the same area liberation like in yugoslavia for instance are we ordinary people right to expect the blue helmets to actually stop wars and be disappointed when they don't well i think there are excessive expectations on what peacekeepers can do at the end of the day it is those who have made war who have waged war who can make peace the peacekeepers they can help them but the key factor in the success or failure of the peacekeeping mission is the parties to the conflict themselves the peacekeepers they can provide the reassurance that is needed when there is no trust they can really enforce peace they don't have the military capacity to do that so would touch. the subject of giving the blue helmets on u.s. peacekeepers men day to use for me if necessary should you and peacekeeping

operations sometimes be given a mandate to use force more freely more often so that situations like rwanda for instance where the un contingent couldn't stop genocide on a repeat themselves again. well i think one of the great changes in the modern in contemporary conflict is that more and more conflicts are within states rather than between states and so non-state actors playing a growing role in wars and non-state actors. can lose more respectability so to speak in the international scene than state actors and so for that they need to be deterred by a stronger force peacekeeping when it was only about maintaining peace between states as an essentially symbolic value when you have militias when you have criminal groups this is a symbol is not enough you need robust you need robust force now from that to

protecting the whole population you mentioned. i don't think the peacekeepers have that capacity what they can do what the united nations can do is focus more on prevention so you don't come you don't come to the point where there is a spirit of violence like the one that happened in rwanda where then the peacekeepers don't have the capacity in the case of run that actually the security council instead of strengthening the mission downsized it so it was a disaster from the beginning a tragedy from the beginning and there are so many wars around the globe why are there only fifteen missions. well because first men peacekeeping is authorized by the security council and the security council doesn't want to spend too much money on peacekeeping it spends already roughly eight billion dollars so it's not small amount of money it's small compared to military

spending in the world but in absolute terms it's not small and second because peacekeepers they are effective if again if the parties to the conflict one. if you just throw peacekeepers at a conflict without. dimona request from the parties to the conflict usually you're disappointed because the peacekeepers again they can help they cannot substitute for the will of the parties to sue for peace so how do you choose the countries that supply peacekeepers to this or that mission are there specific it's conflict that influenced choice language religion climate or does the un just pick whoever is willing to spend the money well there are you so there are only fifteen peacekeeping mission but it's still that's quite a number of peacekeepers and so at the moment the un often has difficulties finding peacekeepers it cannot always choose their countries which are more willing to

provide peacekeepers than others traditionally been big contingents let's say from france and from south asia from pakistan bangladesh india nepal the countries in africa like nigeria like a run down now that i've provide. egypt after of i did significant numbers of peacekeepers when you look at the particular conflict at a particular peacekeeping mission it's important to make sure that the troops involved will not. put any doubt on the impartiality of the mission because it's sensual for a peacekeeping mission success to have the trust of all sides if it is seen as leaning toward one side then it loses the trust and then it loses its effectiveness so earlier this year the un agreed to cut six hundred million dollars from their

organizations nearly eight billion dollars peacekeeping budget and that's under pressure from the united states the trumpet ministration has been skeptical of the u.n. sixty of eighteen general can their organizations peacekeeping survive without for american backing. i think american backing is very important i think some cuts are possible and so far the cuts that have been pushed by the trumpet administration i don't think that they create a fundamental danger for peacekeeping in some ways it's good that the united nation is always looking to do its best with with a minimal amount of resources but it needs resources i hope that the trumpet ministration will be in that respect like the bush administration which in the end recognized that there are many conflicts with the nice is they doesn't want to get

involved and it's good to have the united nations because you don't want chaos and non-government spaces to spread around the world and the un there feels a gap that major powers like the u.s. like russia like in the older members as they get a council. happy to see the united nations filled and i hope the trumpet ministration will adopt that view so the conflicts on everyone's minds today libya syria afghanistan yemen they're not internal or not completely internal they are external forces involved regional global powers is it harder for the un conflict resolution arm to deal with this kind of trouble. it is much harder because as you as you say all the conflicts you have mentioned there are multi-layered and so to have a solution you need agreement between the local actors and national actors but you

also need agreements between the regional actors and you need agreement between the global powers look at syria friends and there has been some progress in this questions between the. united states russia western powers in general that's a very good thing but then you also see that there is still deep divisions let's say between iran. and. saudi arabia on the other side so there is a rigid regional divide that is quite difficult to fix and then you have the the country itself with a great deal of fragmentation of the groups. radical islamist moderate islamist government forces and so to align those three circles the local the regional and the global is incredibly difficult so no offense right but we've seen in syria for instance not on a u.n. peacekeeping efforts big quite successful like the astronaut talks to military

zation agreements is this a future of conflict resolution is it going to be driven more by states rather than united nations. i think the united nations cannot live without the support of its member states so i think. having those who have guns. agreed to. deescalation is important and useful but at the end of the day there is no resolution long term resolution of the conflict in syria without a political agreement and there the un platform remains essential so i think one has to bring a stunna in the u.n. together which current conflict in the walls do you think the united nations has to take care of about of all others. well i think you mentioned

you mentioned yemen this is a humanitarian massive humanitarian crisis in yemen and i think it's a conflict that can be can be sold because yes there is this is a regional confrontation there between iran and saudi arabia the united arab emirates but it's largely at the outset a yemeni can stay so i think it can be solved with more political efforts i think libya is also a conflict that that could be that could be solved because it's the geopolitical dimension is not overwhelming in an ideal world what kind of pressure could the united nations exercise to resolve this conflict. well i think the united nations first as to empower the local actors you see for instance when i look at libya. i went to libya in may and june the u.n. had asked me to do an assessment of the situation there i was struck by the fact

that. the libyans are pulled apart also by external actors and so it's very important for the u.n. to empower the libyans to listen a lot to the libyans so that the external dimension doesn't doesn't dominate the discussion and then the u.n. once it builds its trust the relationship with the libyans then can influence the international actors because it it has a better understanding of the conflict and it it has a chance of convincing them to work together rather than work at cross purposes so it does seem like the u.n. peacekeeping mission is more about settling call flakes rather than preventing them why isn't the u.n. focusing more on prevention. well the secretary general as made clear that he he wants to focus on on prevention i think there are number of situations in the world

where you see problems simmering and the question often is not so much that you are surprised you know you you can draw up a list of places that could blow up but there is not the political will to address that crisis management crowds out so to speak prevention and i think is very important for the secretary of the u.n. and that's what he wants to do and he is. launching reforms to that effect is very important for the united nations to focus on prevention but it needs the support of its key member states to be successful there because we see situations where they are local grievances they are problems that are on resolved and the rest of the world looks the other way until it turns into an open conflict and that's that's dangerous and wrong thank you very much for this interesting insights have mr again no where as discussing a potential deployment of blue helmets and mr in ukraine with former head of u.n.

peacekeeping operations and director of the international crisis group john mattick way no that's it for the latest edition of something called i'll see you next time . thank you. oh. in the us a child can choose an army course in school. with a retired officers as teachers we don't. recruit we'll sisters if the cadet is interested in going in the military but we don't recruit ourselves and see. the pentagon is funding

a program to boost interest in the military among teenagers their chance to step up to an apollo so that also waypoint comfortable with yourself and things out of your shell you can't go wrong with the military it's a great stepping stone for whatever career you want to do but some veterans are willing to tell enthusiastic children a little more they ask me call of duty is very popular first sure video games. it's play and that's because the military like call of duty to turn off call of duty oh yeah or you can turn off the war and lot of these kids just don't hear. the darker side does the pentagon allow them to be told or does it just need more recruits. in case you're new to the game this is how it works not the economy is built around corporate corporations run washington the washington post media the media the voters elected the businessman to run this country business equals power

who must it's not business as usual it's business like it's never been done before . six guys are financial survival. when customers go buy your display. well reduce and lower. that's undercutting but what's good for the market is not good for the global economy. economic development is all about numbers really pleased to report this quarter we are one hundred six points. but what do we know about the other figures. when i think about the fact that our c.e.o. mike do. over twenty million dollars last year more than one thousand times the average wal-mart a says c.n.n. with all due respect i have to say i don't think that's right. is

not just you know a free market works. people went from pretty simple financial lives pre nine hundred eighty to the point now where people are. just totally submerged in their financial accounts and they're all in debt and what exactly devoid society from the part of the government try to do both nicely maybe. it might be making things worse. by saying this is not how capitalism works this is all capitalism goes hopelessly dishonest recently room. i'm.

coming. right. i. think. fifty eight people have now been confirmed dead at a las vegas music festival in what's been called the deadliest mass shooting in united states history. islamic state has claimed responsibility for that attack but the federal bureau of investigation is saying that the shooter has no connection at all to any international terrorist group also to come.