and one rose to twenty thousand dollars. china's building two point one billion dollars. but don't let the numbers will be. the only number you need to remember in one go to miss the one and only. to. get out the next cd you convention i was the chair of the party this fall is the last one for me. will not be running for a fifth term as. party leader after eighteen years charge. for each word from the afternoon of twenty seventh of june on words civilians were

being killed rights groups urged the french government to read launch a probe into the nine hundred ninety four rwandan genocide as video images appearing to show france knew more about the slaughter and it claimed at the time. the formula only to you could push. you but you can only believe your. image can go to the truth. and nato war games protests in norway is true. since the cold war. it's one o'clock am in moscow and you're watching all t. international live from with me now welcome to the program. after almost two decades. angle of merkel says she's stepping down as party leader of the christian

democratic union the german chancellor is also said she won't stand in the next federal election slated for twenty twenty one. at the next c do you party convention in december i will not run for the chair of the party this fourth term is the last one for me. the decision follows the party's disappointing election performance this time in the state of her say where the c.d.u. suffered a double digit loss in its share of the vote with the chancellor admitting the result has been tough to take. he didn't cite the figures that came in overnight from her selection a wholly disappointing and better one than what he does politically it can no longer be business as usual process after this result has after the result and the area after the conflict between the c.d.u. c.s.u. in the summer and after all the difficulties in forming a government coalition as the previous attempts to form one between the c.d.u.

c.s.u. f.t.p. and the green party fell through. it's been about soaked in this and i believe we should pause for a moment and think i hope we see yesterday's election is a turning point that we put to the task we have sat done from the last federal election and until this moment there in lies the opportunity for us. exact time anglo merkel says she will remain as chancellor but is stepping down as the leader of the christian democratic union she had in the past said to jobs being the party leader and being chancellor they went hand in hand and you shouldn't separate one of the other this does come as something of a surprise the city you were in well day or a set of dire straits has been in for a while but angle of merkel's been at the helm for eighteen years she's such a big part of the the d.n.a. of the c.d.u. today so for her to say that she's stepping down and somebody else is going to be shaping that party that's

a that's big news perhaps worth noting that this was probably the most relaxed we've seen angle of of speaking to the press in months it actually lists off the troubles that they faced it's no wonder they find themselves in such a situation in fact as the result started coming in on sunday evening we saw both those within the c.d.u. her own party and her coalition partners already starting to turn on angola merkel and suggesting that there needed to be a change. state of the government isn't acceptable we therefore expect the c.d.u. to take appropriate action wrong and that's how the. this evening there was a very mixed message has there wants the christian democratic union to continue leading this state many people have shown during this election that it must be different not in hester. or with the social democrats and the c.d.u. haemorrhaging votes in has said those votes to go somewhere in the beneficiaries word the green party who put it at the strong showing of the previously doing well

in bavaria and also alternative for germany. and to the parliament and hester for the first time and now it means that they have representation in all sixteen states in germany as well as be represented in the national parliament the bundestag party leadership of the f.d.a. well they were ecstatic at the results with the people's party the f.t. is now represented in every german region after the great success it has. but when it comes to angela merkel the christian democratic union in the coalition it's well held together with sticky tape and popsicle sticks at the moment it comes down to popularity and angela merkel's party has been hemorrhaging popularity world since she made the decision to welcome with open arms refugees and migrants into germany it was a huge issue in the election in twenty seventeen and well it caused problems for them there it caused problems with trying to cobble together

a coalition it took one of the best part of seven months to do that and since the coalition government has been in place since march it's never really looked stable it almost fell apart completely this summer with horses they offered the interior minister threatening to walk out of the cabinet and walk out of the coalition with his christie and social union party he was placated eventually with promises of of limits on refugees and migrants but it hasn't gone away and the problems that as i said started out in the lead up to the twenty seventeen election they then followed through coalition talks they've now started to him. pact on local government and the overall impression of the c.d.u. party in that is why until a merkel's deemed it time to go is the head of the party she says she's going to hang on until twenty twenty one as chancellor be looking to see how she well how she gets on to do that depending on who takes over the job she's vacating as head of her party. angela merkel enjoined a consistently high approval ratings from the first ten years of her leadership but

since twenty fifteen her open door policy on refugees has turned many voters against her. will they see the mystery who oppression political oppression we have a responsibility to help them based on the geneva convention for refugees based on our side and policy and article one of our constitutional whether we want to or not . that her. here. to.

measure that along political russian ality this move by going to merkel is not surprising at all because her party was losing. confidence among the electorate and the reason and so to speak the burden of this party was under merkel herself so it was quite rational for her to leave office as party chairman but they were the less whenever something important happened you usually are surprised by it happening right now and this is why there was rain this uprising that anger merkel is so quickly stronger consequences out of the disaster still a electoral defeats during the last eight elections and if they aren't and in his. michael's announcement that she will no longer lead the christian democratic union comes after decades at the forefront of german politics she began her political

career after the fall of the berlin wall joining the c.d.u. in one thousand nine hundred eighty nine ten years later she became the party's secretary general and its leader in two thousand by two thousand and five american made history by becoming germany's first female chancellor says then she has been re-elected a further three times. but. the time i remember she was always there i mean i can't really remember a time she was like the chancellor and i don't even know if you came before she and i missed america as only much on us yet you argue that america said i think she was

elected in two thousand and five for the first time i was like seven she's just been around forever she's always been an average she's been in power a long time there's a piece of. shit that don't have the slightest. i've never been an adult without under american governing. in two thousand and five she was elected for the first time i was only thirty. years my iolo. a boy from my school died in a traffic accident. in the core melted people died. i went to mississippi for a year as an exchange student. black smoke at obama whites. barack obama became the first black president. and i'm. sure.

french human rights groups are calling for a probe into the ninety ninety four one genocide to be reopened after the news website media paul released a video appearing to show a senior french military officer discussing an ongoing massacre several days before the army chose to intervene france has denied the i.q. section. before you were the only team to put your t.v. but cricketers on the don't believe you do you. make somebody to make you. the genocide in rwanda lasted for about one hundred days and left more than half a million people in that. quarter reports on the case from paris leading french human rights groups called for a reopening of the case on friday trying to get answers from top french military officials about the government's involvement in the one nine hundred ninety four

massacre in the east african country of rwanda now human rights activists are demanding answers one leader of the organization survey is a plaintiff in the case she says it was too premature to close the case while other lawyers are accusing france were in direct complicity in the genocide lines of inquiry were not sufficiently followed up to allow investigators to determine france's military and political responsibility french military authorities were aware that from the afternoon of twenty seventh of june on words civilians were being killed the survivors open the case thirteen years ago although back in july it was scrapped due to lack of evidence and lack of convictions but survivors of the massacre claim they asked the french military for help on june twenty seventh one thousand nine hundred ninety four but the military only came three days later already after hundreds of people were killed in the massacre and the allegation now

is that the french government actually knew what was going on and specifically decided not to intervene the genocide was committed mainly by the hutu government and its backers against the ethnic minority tutsi tribe and allegations of the french government supports for the hutus who carried out most of the slaughter in the genocide have been rough on the french government's relations with the rwandan government for years but the french although they admit that they've made mistakes they say they have no complicity in the genocide that took place there. my. we managed to speak with

one of the massacre survivors do not leave here didn't surprise me i was very happy that the media part of the truth we as the survivors have known this for a long time but it's important that the french people know what happened back in one thousand nine hundred ninety four when the military was there i only know that france are and promised to declassify the arc ifs but it didn't work out everything had published was already known the only thing i have to add is that the french people have to know the truth. live to a journalist and that garrison a contributor to the black agenda report coming out of the program and now did say in the french government but as any it was sponsibility for what happened in rwanda twenty four years ago. most likely other way it might i don't i don't think it's the responsibility that is usually ascribed to it.

near the end rant or near the end of the hundred days that it was hundred days grant a window a humanitarian corridor into the democratic republic of the congo or hutus who were fleeing the advance of gandhi's duty army reminded patriotic strength. in what i noticed about the introduction to this. was that it was about one story it didn't have much context and the context of their one genocide was a four year war that began on october first one nine hundred ninety when a detachment gone an army invaded rwanda from uganda. they were primarily and were led by. two g.

refugees who had fled rwanda in one thousand nine hundred fifty nine one nine hundred sixty. or nine hundred sixty one when the hutu majority after many years of oppression by the tutsi more minority in a more or less huge sort of social structure. claimed claim to government. and if the video shows french officers discussing a specific massacre in this as a row hills in june one thousand nine hundred four when hundreds were killed they appear to know what was going on while the military was turning a blind eye how incriminating is this a video. well. first of all the whole start just something wrong with the whole story now i

believe that there were hutu massacres by the duty army that even exceeded the number two to mask response for tragedies horrible tragedies now and that story about a french army in that instance. i don't know enough about that instance to judge the video i mean video ok let's let let's rephrase it if that video is proven to be true and it shows french officers discussed discussing a specific massacre but turning their backs on it. is that right should they should there not be some kind of punishment for the us or at least some acknowledgement. i'm having a hard time answering this question i was quite

a simple question if there's video evidence as i just said it's quite a simple question. ok did the french have a mandate to different have a mandate come out of the question the question was if there's video evidence of a senior french officer turning their backs on what is obviously a massacre should there not be acknowledgement or recognition that people were in fact not acting right at that point in time. possibly but you have to understand this argument between france and rwanda has been going on since one thousand nine hundred four and there are instances of un peacekeepers. being being told to stand down and ignore the massacre of eight thousand. refugees. so just focus on this one incident and on french soldiers in this incident in poses

a list the received narrative about what happened in rwanda upon this story i mean if if french artists is observed. and they had a mandate to intervene then they did something wrong. soldiers typically. do night tonight take action now demanding ok we understand and thank you very much for coming on to the program run out of time now and a contributor to the black agenda report thank you. ok thank you. hundreds of antiwar protesters have gathered in oslo against nature trails in norway that comes after moscow how the town major trial of last month might cast death as the details.

fifty thousand troops two hundred and fifty aircraft sixty five warships and ten thousand tanks and vehicles it's a pretty straightforward message it is ambitious and it is demanding in recent years europe's security environment significant deteriorated nato has been careful not to mention moscow as the boogeyman which the exercise is aimed against but there are no illusions nato jets will be flying a mere two hundred kilometers from russian border us troops will be learning to fight in cold conditions against a simulated enemy that is and surprisingly exactly as powerful as moscow. the effect of this activity will increase the tension between norway and russia despite

quite clumsy attempts by the representatives of the alliance and its member states to picture such military activity as defensive it's obvious that this fighting capabilities demonstration has a distinct anti russian character tensions now a worse than they've been in a third of a century both nato and moscow have been go into it streams staging bigger and bigger war games russia's vostok maneuvers natives trident war games record size for both this year and each blaming each other for stock demonstrates russia's focus on exercising large scale conflict it fits into a pattern we've seen over some time and more assertive russia significantly increasing its defense budget and its military presence wait wait wait getting a little carried away that russia's military budget has been decreasing not increasing year after year you would have thought nato intelligence would have

spotted that now compare moscow's military spending to nato's which is almost a trillion dollars a year it literally accounts for harf the world's military spending i mean there's no competition here in this the need to use military activity at the borders of russia has reached an unprecedented post cold war level bloc countries are engaged in offensive drills the aim of all this is increase capacity to swiftly deploy troops across europe. it's a remarkable cycle nato builds up its forces. responds by building up its own which nato then calls russian aggression and uses it to justify stationing more tanks more troops near russia. and repeat it's not really had real i think he said provoke a she missed it. try to look back at it typical. nato drills we have of the

thirty's in the eighty's the typical would be that we had ten thousand participants now we've got more than fifty one thousand is sigil political struggle between the united states and russia are going on all very impressive as far as military escalations go but what with all these war games this propaganda militant rhetoric and collapsing arms treaties one can only wonder how long can we go on like this and much more we can escalate the for a stupid decision or an accident puts a spark to this trillion dollar powder keg. founder julian assange claims that could or is planning to end his political asylum and hand him over to the u.s. that's after an ecuadorian court threw out a scientist lawsuit over his living conditions at the country's embassy in london earlier the ecuadorian embassy issued a memo giving giving a sergeant a list of rules to follow if he wants to continue his six year stay in the building

they include restrictions on personal visits and a ban on communications that could harm ecuador or its relations with foreign states well we're joined now by peter tatchell a human rights activist discuss this further peter welcome to the program now you know solid she's saying that ecuador wants him out of the embassy and they want to hand him over to the u.s. all that ecuador has not confirmed this yet what do you think is likely to happen. while let's be clear the conditions imposed on during a songe by the ecuadorian authorities are extremely draconian they are in some respects similar to the kinds of restrictions that a prisoner would face in a maximum security jail so to give an example. or authorities reserve for themselves on their own whim to decide whether he can have visitors or not they

will decide who the visitors are when they'll come how long they'll stay but also those visitors including his own lawyers must and codes and passwords their laptops their mobile phones and that the ecuador authorities reserve the right to take information from those private confidential sources and give them to ever they wish they also reserve the right to confiscate anything bought in to the embassy by a visitor to julian assange now of course in some risk. some aspects of these conditions are reasonable but the way they're being imposed very clearly with the intention of making life on bearable for mistress does appear to be part of a deliberate try g. to make life so bad for him that he voluntarily leaves even though ecuador is saying that he's welcome to stay and i mean what's into diva listed you know all

those conditions that peter and as we mentioned before the ecuadorian court nevertheless throughout a songes lawsuit over the new rules yesterday at the embassy in your opinion with any merit to his case. was certainly as a citizen of ecuador after all he was during the sars was granted citizenship of the door by the government he has all the rights that go with citizenship and these include freedom of expression freedom of association freedom of access to information so clearly some aspects of the new conditions imposed by a good or are in violation of those basic fundamental civil liberties principles which would not be tolerated in ecuador itself yet the ecuadorian embassy in london is ecuadorian territory and it's imposing very different much tougher restrictions

that would on ecuador and citizens living in ecuador itself so that is i think a strong case in favor of mr sun and i'm somewhat perplexed that the ecuadorian courts have rejected his application. i can't say why that was refused but it is strange because the court in ecuador do have a reasonably good record in of holding civil liberties and the rights of the citizen i mean you know they have they haven't peter given you know given the reasons but the ecuadorian president lenin marina has described. the situation as an inherited a problem from the former government. does caden now just see him as an inconvenience do you think and does it have anything to gain from keeping him at the embassy. where of course. was granted refuge in the embassy. on the

basis that he would being granted political asylum and citizenship of ecuador and of course with police or saddam and citizenship go certain rights and indeed responsibilities the previous government seemed to happily accept that it seemed to recognize that there was a real danger that if judas was either forced out of the embassy or voluntarily stepped outside the embassy he would be seized by the british authorities he would be penalized for having skipped bail which indeed he did and that it was was unlawful but more worryingly that the british authorities would then hand him over to the united states where a secret grand jury has been convened with the intention of stopping him with a whole range of charges carrying prison sentences of thirty forty or even fifty years in jail now that is pretty clear what the u.s. is angling for neither the ecuadorian government nor the british government have

said they will not hand over mr saunders to the u.s. neither country has given an assurance if they gave the assurance then i suspect would step outside the embassy he would face those charges for skipping a veil and then he would be free to go his way after the appropriate fine or maybe even a short prison term in a british jail that would resolve the matter but since neither the u.s. leader of the u.k. nor the ecuadorian government are willing to give it a short. it's that mr assad will not be handed over to the americans then quite obviously he is in great fear and greed in great danger that he could be extradited to the us and you know extradited for what he published material leaked by chelsea manning the whistleblower which channel light on human rights abuses and war crimes

by the united states and double standards and duplicity by the us government in its diplomatic relations he caused an inconvenience and embarrassment to the u.s. government in my view that was a great public service he gave the american public and the rest of the world the information to know what the u.s. government and military were really doing we should have information as a matter of course you know government is supposed to be of the people for the people and by the people but it wasn't so julius took that information that chelsea manning had provided and published it in the same way that the new york times and the guardian in london have also published that material so why is junior so and being singled out as a publisher when these other big publishing houses are not being slapped with a grand jury and the prospect of thirty forty or fifty years in jail is.