Bolton a new Nuclear Arms Race and to discuss that question im joined here in the studio by freed astute observers and lists beginning with berlin based paediatrician alex rosen whos president of the german section of the Organization International physicians for the prevention of nuclear war and dr rosen says a new Nuclear Arms Race has already begun Nuclear Weapons are incompatible with International Humanitarian law and should be back also with us is there a curse author and journalist who writes for the Los Angeles Times he asks all those people in western europe who are so worried about every new Nuclear Arms Race wherever theyve been since two thousand and eight when russia started testing cruise missiles in violation of the i n f and a very warm welcome to two hundred shells Senior Correspondent with Reuters News Agency where she focuses on security and defense issues and drab believes that President Trumps decision is emblematic of this confrontational style of politics but it also has to do with growing unease about china and other countries that were never part of the treaty which will for even being here im quoting it today id like to begin with you andrea and i would like to ask you. As you will you sleep just a little bit less restfully these last couple of days since President Trumps announcement that hes going to scrap the i. M. F. Treaty absolutely i mean i think that we are in a situation now where so many of the institutions that have sate the post cold war era are being called into question and and there is a lot of concern all over the world i think about the framework that kind of kept Nuclear Weapons in tech being eroded and i recognize really clearly recognize that other that this treaty is outdated and needs to be updated because there are so many other players now that have developed these sort of shorter range and intermediate range missiles but we you know it doesnt seem like the right thing to be doing to be backing away from such an important treaty at least rosen give more to andre is saying is there and i dont mean this question from frivolously is it time now to Start Building bunkers in the governors people not so long ago ones actually did or we are seeing in fact a return to some of the cold war dynamics to the cold war rhetoric on both sides of the of the atlantic and this is extremely worrying for us here in germany here in europe because we know that in the case of a military military confrontation between the u. S. And russia this is going to take place here in europe and that was the reason why in the one nine hundred eighty s. There were hundreds of thousands of people in germany in europe protesting against the deployment of of these intermediates range Nuclear Missiles and for europe that is safer without these missiles and to go back to that time just seems like an absolute folly at this time where we are moving towards a more. Secure and unsafe a world what we need right now is not less peace and Security Architecture not Less International treaties but more and we would actually need the leaders of russia and us to sit down at a table and discuss the problems that each have with their i n f treaty both of them are accusing each other of violating the treaty you know this needs to be discussed in negotiations and not through threats or ultimatums erikas from how serious is the situation the New York Times says that people in europe and the United States a calling it a cold war that has already begun to emerge is that public talk well i mean i think the cold war began in two thousand and fourteen with crimea so you can go back a bit further in two thousand and eight russia started installing these cruise missiles in western europe as well so that the treaty has sort of been not really in force for quite a while now i mean i sleep just as well now as i did it was a week or two ago i have no problem sleeping i dont feel any more afraid now i think trump is a very transactional character a prep transactional president he likes to do deals i think this is the first law in a negotiation process that will probably lead to a new i. N. F. Treaty with china this time china wasnt a player thirty years ago china is a very big player now so i think this is just an opening lobby in trumps game to get a deal he loves deals he wants to do a deal with both china and russia hes not canceling the treaties talking about canceling it this is a process that will take a long time i dont think people need to Start Building their bunkers yet you got tired you know why is it why has he come out and why now. Hes been the table as advisor for a long time that russias been violating the treaty obama wanted was telling russia youre violating the treaty nato has talked about this is well this is just this is not just a trump thing i know in germany people like to jump on trump and criticize him for everything happens but this is been going on for a while obama also raised the same issues perhaps with different language obama was considering scrapping it as well its not just. I think its important to say that the u. S. Military has had growing concerns about Chinese Military activities for many years now i think around two thousand and seven the chinese destroyed a satellite outside of us as head of the earths orbit and that was a real wake up call because it demonstrated a at a tendency on the part of the chinese and really a doctrine to develop Weapons Systems of all kinds that could be used to assert chinese power and really since that time theres been growing concern in the u. S. Particularly and that you know that rhetoric or rather the discussion of the concerns about the i. M. F. Treaty also come kind came in that period afterwards so its really not just about russias violations its also about this deep seated concern that u. S. Military advisors have that they you know backed out of a treaty with the treaty basically backed away from the Development Efforts but that other countries were not bound by that and so its china and iran and korea and other countries have been working on these Weapons Systems that could be very dangerous indeed and need to be brought into a treaty the question is whether the kind of you know the stamp your foot and big stick policy is the right way to get to a treaty that encompasses more signatories. I completely agree and i think were making two fundamental mistakes in this in this discourse in this debate internationally the first is where we are again back to playing the blame game russia is accusing the u. S. Of breaking or violating the spirit of the treaty by installing antiballistic missiles around russia also in poland and in romania land based missiles that could also break the i n f whereas the u. S. Is accusing russia of combining land based missile launchers with intermediate nuclear Nuclear Missiles and while there is no actual proof of any violation there is definitely the situation that we all feel that both countries are not acting in the spirit of this agreement so what we should be doing instead of playing the blame game is we should be looking towards solutions what are the possibilities to salvage and to improve this important piece of Security Architecture and the second mistakes that i think a lot of us are making in discussing this topic is were looking at this problem solely from a military Strategic Point a few who has a right to according to which treaty to place which kinds of weapons of mass destruction where whereas we should be looking at it from the point of view of humanitarian law which clearly states that the type of weapon that was designed to target civilian population is in clear violation of International Humanitarian law of the geneva conventions and should be banned and this is the process that that the world is in right now. To to actually get this Nuclear Weapons ban treaty that was issued in two thousand and seventeen ratified and get it to become active and to work with it and not to go back to a world where countries were threatening each other with the use of weapons of mass destruction against opposing civilian population ok many people argue that the end of treaty is obsolete and has been so for a long time but for most europeans its the cornerstone of their security lets go back a little bit in time. By the late one nine hundred eighty s. The cold war was winding down in one thousand nine hundred seven u. S. President Ronald Reagan and his soviet counter about Mikhail Gorbachev signed the socalled by and after eating it banned both sides from owning and constructing land based intermediate range Nuclear Armed missiles with a range of between five hundred and five thousand five hundred kilometers the Nuclear Arms Race was finally over. And two years later the berlin wall fell. Several years earlier and despite widespread public opposition new intermediate range Nuclear Armed missiles had been deployed in europe as part of nato as nine hundred eighty three double track decision. This determined stance from a western perspective was needed to force russia to agree to nuclear disarmament. But is the i. N. F. Treaty still fit for purpose. No i think weve already agreed that is it alex rosen case no of finessing the treaty or is it a case for you of banning Nuclear Weapons altogether well i dont think its one or the other we have a very complex architecture of security here in europe that has developed over time and has ensured that Nuclear Weapons have not been used in europe. And this is this was the antiballistic missile treaty which the u. S. Left in two thousand and one this is the i. N. F. Treaty and we have the o. E. C. D. We have the Nuclear Proliferation treaty and all of these treaties play a vital role but that does not mean that they are the final goal of nuclear evolution what we really need is the realisation that Nuclear Weapons per definition violate humanitarian law and that just as weve done with other weapons of mass destruction Chemical Biological weapons landmines cluster ammunition there needs to be an international agreement. To get rid of these Nuclear Weapons and this does not happen overnight it takes a lot of confidence building it takes a lot of. Intermediate steps and getting out of a vital part of the Security Architecture here in europe is definitely not the right way towards a world where it becomes possible to negotiate about reducing and abolishing Nuclear Weapons this is what we must see regardless of how we view the ins as a treaty and. I just wanted to say that i think that we are in an environment where you know eric just said that President Trump is very transactional so that the question is what forms of leverage exist right so. In both russia and china are have they have tremendous economic problems coming out them the chinese economy is slowing russia has had many many Financial Issues that are starting to really bear fruit and are certain to result in some protests even against putin. So perhaps the savvier thing to do would be to sit down at a table with the leaders of russia and china and to say look you know the Global Economy is that problem you know than can be a debt instead every can making argue that donald trump has walked into a trap that he has suggested scrapping the well hes giving the russians these two society it was that they scrapped the goods and scrapped the agreement yeah i mean as he said its going to be a blame game going around but what he described as a very utopian world would be nice to say ok no more Nuclear Weapons and the russians will just dismantle others the americans in the end it was not going to happen in our lifetime anyway i dont think thats going to happen that were going to be scrapping Nuclear Weapons everywhere unfortunately theyre here to stay theyre going to be here and i think people the United States agree totally with trump you have to be tough with with the russians you cannot just let them violate the treaty for eight years or ten years and do nothing about it as im sure this has been talked about for a long time in the u. S. You know letting them go on by by violating the treaty with no consequences just was going to work anymore. I think were in the in the nuclear evolution movement or used to. The word naive when were talking about or utopian ideas of a Nuclear Free World but what we must always say is it is equally naive if not more naive to believe that the status quo of hoping that no country use Nuclear Weapons of hoping that no accident happens no hacker. Reaches into the Nuclear Launch codes and that all governments are always saying our military commanders are always responsible in their use with Nuclear Weapons that this will continue forever we see that in the past during the cold war there have been several dozens incidents where the world came very very close to Nuclear Annihilation and if you asked the people responsible back then the militaries the politicians they unequivocal all agree that it was luck and divine intervention as they call it that Nothing Happened so this is not a system that we can rely on for future security either we get rid of Nuclear Weapons or they get rid of us and the question we must ask ourselves whats the realistic the most practical and realistic step by step approach towards a world free of Nuclear Weapons and we believe that just as was the case with other weapons of mass destruction we must first create an environment and a Public Discourse that views these weapons for what they are weapons of mass destruction that violate humanitarian law and then we can begin discussing who is actually profiting from these Nuclear Weapons which companies are producing them which banks are funding these. These companies which governments are using and deploying Nuclear Weapons and how is their population viewing this and theres a huge majority in all of the Nuclear Weapon states that oppose the continued use of Nuclear Weapons so we should approach the problem from from an activist from a Civil Society point of view and really talk about Human Security and not about military options for using weapons of mass destruction. Yeah i mean it all sounds really good but i just i just dont see it happening what body is going to leave this the u. N. The veto powers theres always the veto at the u. N. Security council just isnt going to happen is it what is going to happen. Hopefully there will be some sit down and will be a new treaty with china involved and it will be another thirty years or twenty years of relative security this is actually a real opportunity for europe that i mean its an opportunity for europe to get unified around something that is the very near and dear to the heart of european because were talking about shorter and medium intermediate range missiles that could reach here i mean that was why the i have treaty was negotiated in the first place because because it was so it was so much in europes interest so europe if they could finally unify around some issue could act as a kind of a counterweight to say to been ok guys lets have a reasonable discussion about this and lets work out something that includes all of the threat these these threats you said hopefully and this is exactly the point i think its its very telling that the people who are promoting or applauding the step to get out of the iron if by and by the u. S. Government are always saying well we hope that afterwards we will sit down with the chinese we hope that Something Better will come along we hope the russians will wreck this way whereas i think the more responsible approach from leaders and from a strategic should be to really sit down and think what is realistic how can we realistically negotiate a better treaty and what what what we feel needs to happen you said europe needs to come together i think also the German Government has a very big responsibility to play because we host Nuclear Weapons here on our soil u. S. American Nuclear Weapons twenty of them are positioned here in air base and we are part of nato were part of the Nuclear Umbrella and we are part of threatening russia with the use of Nuclear Weapons at the same time we are being threatened by Nuclear Weapons so we have a role to play we have a voice and the German Government should not stick to its previous position that as part of nato in the Nuclear Umbrella we always have to oppose. Russia we have to show strength but to act as an intermediate between that its really just its lower than you think its under your system so i mean i think i think germany has had that intermediary role and has tried to preserve it you know and its really at odds with the u. S. Government on a number of issues including for instance the nordstrom to gas pipeline project which i from a german perspective is a critical element of that policy of continued engagement with russia so i would say that the German Government however effectively has really tried to keep the door open for dialogue both with russia and with china in trying to sort of continue to be able to play a role as a as a sort of a mediator if you will. The question is what structure can that conversation take place and and thats where its really you know its incumbent upon those countries that are the biggest players that have the biggest stick to get over the jump over their shadows and get down and fit down and get down to business and do it but the thing is i mean for the past decades weve always talked about the Nuclear Weapons states as the ones who have the responsibility to solve these problems while ignoring that the entire worlds population and the the other one hundred and eighty five countries also have a vital stake because they are the ones that will be affected by a nuclear war and what i can with the international complain to abolish Nuclear Weapons has done for the first time is to give these countries a voice and to look not only towards the Nuclear Weapon states for solutions but to look at the mall to multilateral organizations like the United Nations for leadership and for the countries affected by a nuclear war to step up and say we are no longer prepared to be bullied and to be pressured by the Nuclear Weapon states were saying they need Nuclear Weapons for their own security. But we would not become safer with Nuclear Weapons so this argument just does not hold no country in the world becomes safe from Nuclear WeaponsNuclear Weapons threaten the security of the world does it take a shock yeah just just before we can see lets go lets go back to what president s trump and putin have actually been saying in the last couple of days and we can see this good discussion about who is leading this this issue. Speaking in a father from france and that his governments what it can start developing into media range Nuclear Missiles if russia does not agree to a new treaty. Were the ones that have stayed in the agreement and we bought it great but russia is not fortunately on to the agreement so were going to terminate a break but were going to pull out. By president putin countered that nato is Missile Defense science in romania could easily be used to launch us new cannot cruise missiles. This way the us is in fact leading to the destruction of the intermediate range and you can have forces treaty are constantly searching for some violations from outside and are consistently doing it themselves of the same way as they had consistently want tom leaving the antiballistic missile treaty. Trump frances putin a new showdown in europe. Versus putin eric and the chinese in the equation as well how are they going to be brought together these free antagonists of presumably their own selfinterest i mean i think all three countries are enjoying the fruits of the prosperity of the world trade and theyll theyll want to Work Together i mean you mentioned earlier people are applauding trump pulling out of the i. M. F. I dont think anybody applauded i think people understand why the us after so many years of violations is threatening to pull out and talking to pull out because trump wants a new deal he wants an updated modern deal that reflects the reality of twenty eighteen in one thousand nine hundred eighty seven. Is going to happen any time soon i mean were talking about the two gentlemen now meeting nov eleventh in paris well look back a year or so ago all the fears about south korea north korea with the missiles being launched there anybody thought trump was a was out of his mind. And all of a sudden theyre talking and theyre not shooting the missiles anymore i mean trump is a whole different kind of character as a whole different style given the chips i mean sometimes his unorthodox way of getting deals and getting conversations in the go do lead to deletes results in United States hes extremely popular right now just in the us for a few weeks and there are states hes doing really really well the blue wave that everybody was putting into the midterms is disappearing the senate is going to probably stay in republican hands perhaps even the house its a real shock so trump policies work and sometimes he is successful the economy is booming unemployment is a fifty year low give him a little bit of the benefit of the doubt and is this is this a rerun of nafta with trump first of all saying im pulling out in the number of negotiating a revote something on the Korean Peninsula with threats being made and then to go she asians beginning that we single out again is the i think that is that of the approach but we havent seen that happen for instance on the Climate Change treaty where he did pull out and iran its taken a very long time to sort of move on to the next step its just not happened yet what. Again i think that you know a strong europe could really help in this case and i think a lot of people around the world are waiting for that chancellor here quite a strong europe but europe appears to many has been a would this been used in recent days quite just and europe appears helpless so just with the Current Situation you have you are europe seems like a potential battlefield but not much more in the current debate but this really is and it could be an opportunity i mean sometimes politics works for shock so sometimes you know in this case this this isnt unexpected and mean the u. S. Is than expected to pull out of the i. N. F. Treaty for quite some time and so theres been a build up to that perhaps what it takes is a recognition that now it is time for another player in this case europe could be that player to step up and say. Now it is time let us convene and me. Reading these principle players that are involved in these agreements. You know i think sometimes politics takes that shock and you know President Trump has perfected the art of confrontation as a sort of opening salvo for negotiation in this case i just dont know. More likely to be the leaders of europe and all the people of europe taking to the streets who are going to create a new dynamic here there are a lot of problems right now in within the u. N. Within the European Countries i really feel that the Civil Society. In all of these countries need to sensible measures. More security in europe rather than less security so i do see both as having a responsibility to act and comfortable enough to move it right further were going to some weve been discussing today. If a new Nuclear Arms Race question thanks very much for joining us come back next week. Road which Miramax Europe find the most populous countries to visit sky go for god stuff and know some sound. Im treasures of contract and history. Of cars of europe every day very strange not a romance on the thirty minutes on d w. This is g w news why go from berlin to bring in our correspondent ophelia harmes a relation joins us from Rio De Janeiro we are here to find out what happened to be a sunny day and she is the head of the environment teeming with music of the car spun that sandra has assigned ferry and we do have some of breaking news thats coming into us now its all about the prospective closer up w. News. Thank you for joining us. Time for an upgrade. How about funding church grows old white. House with no. Good. Design highlights you can rate yourself. On stoops and tricks that will turn your home to special. Upgrade yourself with d ws interior design channel on you tube. Journey state by state. The most colorful. The lifeless. The most traditional. Find it all any time. Check in with a web special. Take a tour of germany state by state. W. Dot com. Climate change. Waste. Pollution. Isnt it time for good news eco africa people and projects that are changing no ones are meant for the better its up to us to make a difference lets inspire other. People with Good Environment magazine. Long d. W. This is deja news coming to you live from berlin tookie convicts a German National on terrorism charges a Turkish Court sentences a man into six is interest in full membership of an ugly old kodesh militia but his family say he was in turkey on a hiking trip and also coming up at the u. S. Investigators search a postal facility enough miami for clues into the attempted may bombings we speak to a former cia bureau chief about the investigation. And are we seeing a foreign relations