again and again. we have also made it clear nuclear war can not be won and should never be fought and nato remains a nuclear alliance and that is part of essential deterrence and defence and may closely monitor what russia does. and so far we have not seen any changes in the russian nuclear posturing, that requires any changes in our posture but we remain vigilant, we monitor closely what they do and we will take the necessary steps to always ensure we have credible deterrence for all allies and again, this is not about provoking conflict, it is about preserving peace, preventing misunderstanding and miscalculations in moscow about our readiness to protect all allies because together nato allies represent 50% of the world nuclear might and so long as
going on for a long time, what are your more educated questions. first question, what did they over fly. and most important, what type of sensors did they have? we know from pictures of first one that was shot down off of east coast it had the ability to geo locate signals, probably also had optic to see. i would really be curious to know about, because of where it flew over did these balloons also have the ability to detect radio n and more censors to pinpoint where our tragedy inarsenal is located that would be a indication of perhaps changing nuclear posturing in beijing, there has been speculation of them changing from no first use to launch on warning. this could be a preliminary
telling a u.s. business lobby group he s willing to work with the u.s. to find ways to cooperate. there have been signs of possible tweaks in china s position on ukraine, xi jinping telling the visiting german chancellor that beijing opposes the threat or use of nuclear weapons, which is seen as a subtle rebuke to mr. putin, given the russian leader s nuclear posturing. all of this is why chinese state media, as well as officials, echoing american officials saying the meeting itself is a positive sign, stressing the importance of keeping lines of communication open at the highest level, especially when tensions are running high. the problem here, of course, the relationship is in a freefall. not because of the lack of a rapport between the leaders, who have known each other for years. it is really because how each side views its own strengths and the other side s intentions. washington, of course, has been increasingly vocal about china under sociaxi jinping becoming
for one country is clearly an what do you think might yet be at this stage it is quite unclear, russian has responded to the possibility of finland and swedenjoining nato and sweden joining nato negatively. and swedenjoining nato negatively. it and sweden “oining nato negatively. negatively. it promises retaliation negatively. it promises retaliation in negatively. it promises retaliation in technicall negatively. it promises i retaliation in technical and military terms and this could take a number of different forms, it is anticipated that could involve cyber attacks, disinformation, violations of airspace with sweden in particular which is quite familiar with by now, hybrid attacks, over issues or instances short of war. it has been significant concern about the nuclear element, though. there has been a lot of nuclear posturing, russia has put its
intervention at the highest level if this nuclear posturing goes on. the white house has issued a response to this immediately saying, in every step of this conflict, putin as manufactured threats to justify more aggressive actions. he was never under threat from ukraine, or from nato, which is a defensive alliance that will not fight in ukraine. the only reason his forces face a threat today is because they invaded a sovereign country, and one without nuclear weapons. this is yet another escalatory and totally unnecessary step. this is true. there was no threat to russia from ukraine. there was never any threat. russia invented, and various times, you and i have talked about this for weeks, a threat that nato has been a coaching upon them, a threat that there are nazis running ukraine. the idea that there is a genocide of russian-speaking people in donetsk and luhansk. none of this is true.