Main content

Ukraine - to intervene or not to intervene.

Michael Buerk chairs debate examining the moral issues behind one of the week's news stories. With Anne McElvoy, Ash Sarkar, Matthew Taylor and Tim Stanley.

President Putin insists that he has no intention of invading Ukraine. In amassing troops and weapons along the border, the Russians are merely β€˜protecting their national interests’. Meanwhile NATO, the US-European military alliance, is busy reinforcing its eastern member states with ships and planes. Our own Prime Minister has issued dire warnings that Russia will not be allowed to harass a smaller neighbour in this way. So, who is right? Is there a moral imperative for us to protect a fledgling democracy that seems to be under threat? What, if anything, can we – or should we – do to support Ukraine? And what moral arguments do we have, to help us decide?

Perhaps this is just aggressive posing by both sides that will drift on and die down. But what if it becomes something more? What if it embroils us in a European war? And if that happens, who will be to blame? Given the record of the UK and the West in Afghanistan and Iraq, do we even have the appetite for another foreign intervention? Is the very idea morally dubious? And, in any case, doesn’t the size of Russia’s nuclear arsenal make it impossible for us to call Putin’s bluff? With Global Governance Professor Mary Kaldor; Russia Expert Keir Giles; Newspaper Columnist Simon Jenkins and Kyiv University Political Scientist Taras Kuzio.

Produced by Olive Clancy

Available now

43 minutes

Last on

Sat 29 Jan 2022 22:15

Broadcasts

  • Wed 26 Jan 2022 20:00
  • Sat 29 Jan 2022 22:15

The Evidence Toolkit

The Evidence Toolkit

Check out the claims made in news stories with this interactive tool.

Podcast