but we don t know whether he was on it. just over a week ago, lukashenko said prigozhin had arrived in belarus. on thursday, lukashenko said prigozhin is in russia. translation: as for prigozhin, he is in saint petersburg. - he may have gone to moscow this morning or somewhere else. he is not on the territory of belarus. lukashenko also said the question of whether the wagner units would relocate to belarus was still in the balance , and would depend on the decisions taken by moscow and by wagner. he made those comments to a very small gathering ofjournalists, including the bbc s steve rosenberg. well, less than two weeks ago we were told that alexandr lukashenko had brokered a deal under which the mutiny would end and yevgeny prigozhin would move from russia to belarus and any wagner fighters who wanted to could join him in belarus. today, mr lukashenko
they are russian weapons. he said, well, if ukraine can fight with other peoples weapons, meaning nato weapons, then why can t i? the new york times is reporting that president biden is leaning towards sending ukraine cluster munitions which can be used to drop small bombs across land that can indiscriminately hurt civilians. more than 100 countries signed a ban on them dating more than 15 years back, according to the un. the us is not party to this band. ukraine is facing dwindling resources as it continues its counter offensive against russia. it is requesting more support from its allies. meanwhile russian missiles hit the western city of lviv, killing at least six people. ukraine s air force says the missile strike deliberately targeted civilians, despite russia claiming they only go after military targets. our gordon corera is in kyiv with the latest. the city of lviv is way out in the west of the country close to the polish border, a long way from the frontlines of this confl
prepared to do. are you i concerned this might give russia an excuse to use even more severe weapons on the battlefield as well? i’m more severe weapons on the battlefield as well? battlefield as well? i m not, they have battlefield as well? i m not, they have already battlefield as well? i m not, they have already used - battlefield as well? i m not, | they have already used these weapons, the russians are at, their backside to the wall, they are being pushed out of they are being pushed out of the country. the russians don t have to do, they have already used these weapons and the other weapons, including their aircraft, which the ukrainians have many fewer, the russians have many fewer, the russians have an advantage. this is what the ukrainians need to do to push the russians out of the country. 50 push the russians out of the count . ,, push the russians out of the count y., ., push the russians out of the count . i. ., country. so you are confident that cluster country
ukraine? the question is, can we provide ukraine? the question is, can we provide the ukraine? the question is, can we provide the ukrainians - ukraine? the question is, can| we provide the ukrainians with what they need to win this war? ukrainians need to be able to push the russians out of the country. they are using artillery at a rapid rate, they are running out of shells, ammunition for their artillery, there are more artillery shells that are both cluster munitions and others. in order to support the ukrainians as they pushed the ukrainians as they pushed the russians out, we need to provide this ammunition. but what about provide this ammunition. but what about the provide this ammunition. but what about the fact as i said that other countries including allies of the us have banned these weapons, saying they indiscriminately cause the death of civilians?- indiscriminately cause the death of civilians? they cause the death death of civilians? they cause the death of de
invading another country and russia might start invading another countries as well, so it is an absolutely fundamental principle of international order that is at stake. so it s far more than ukraine. we care about ukraine but it is far more than ukraine that is at stake. sergey radchenko, you are russian born and you can obviously don t speak for the russian government but you can give us some insights perhaps into the russian s perspective on this. what do you read into the russian build up of troops? is itjust posturing, trying to blackmail the west or is there real danger there, do you think? i mean, i think putin is not adversed to brinkmanship. i think he does engage in brinkmanship. but i would not say that he is bluffing. you ve got a massive build up of military sources and it s you ve got a massive build up of military forces and it s like anton chekhov said, if in act one, you have a gun on the stage, in act three, it is bound to go off so i would not underestimate