 The agreement between Russia and Ukraine to allow the shipping of food grain and fertilizers has ended. What does this mean for peace and for global food security? Tunisia and the European Union claim to have come to a new understanding on steps to be taken to tackle immigration via what Europe calls illegal routes. While this is being built as a step to hurt human trafficking or human traffickers, we ask how it will affect the thousands who are forced to leave home in the hope of staying alive? And at Wimbledon, we have new champions, which is always of course a good sign as far as the health of the sport is concerned. But is this the much awaited generational change of guard? Sharda Ogre, the world-famous sports writer, will tell us what she thinks. You're watching The Daily Debrief coming to you as always from the People's Dispatch Studios here in New Delhi. I'm Siddharth Ani and on the show today, first up, in another blow to the prospect of peace in Eastern Europe as well as to global food security. The agreement between Russia and Ukraine to allow shipments of food grain as well as fertilizers to be shipped through, of course, Turkish as well as Russian-controlled waters stands terminated. The last ship left Ukraine on Sunday bringing the total up to 32 million tons of material that Russia has allowed to be shipped out since the deal came into force in July last year. Abdul is with us in the studio and covers some of the subjects for People's Dispatch. Abdul, explain to us why the deal fell apart. It took so long to broker the UN as well as Turkey had to come together to bring the two parties to the table. Russia, of course, the Kremlin claiming that each side of the bargain has not been maintained. And that is the primary reason. If you see, Russia has been pushing for. There are many, earlier the details were not there but now the details are out. And one specific demand which Russians had put when the deal was finalized last year in July was the basically revocation of Russian agricultural banks deal-inking from the Swift payment system. Once the payment system, it was dealing because of the sanctions imposed on Russia by European Union and the US since the war in Ukraine started. Of course, that Russians export of its own agricultural products became much more difficult because the payment of most of the countries come through the Swift system. So, they had demanded that they will allow the grain export from Ukraine through the Black Sea in return that the Russian agricultural bank is linked again to the Swift. Even the ability to basically transact. So, that was one of the main reasons cited by the Russians for, in fact, Putin when he spoke on Thursday, he basically specified this part of Russian concern. The other important element of course was Russia's concern that the deal was signed primarily to ease the food prices, global food prices to help the poorer countries in Africa in particular which are still suffering from the high food grain prices because they are predominantly dependent on grains from Ukraine and Russia. Instead of exporting the grains to the poorer countries, 40% of all the grain went to Western Europe, the richest countries on the globe and that basically Russia has been raising this issue. Each time when there was an extension coming, Russia reiterated these demands. Apparently, none of these demands were addressed and that is the reason basically after giving an ultimatum on Thursday and seeing that nothing concrete is coming as per the reports UN General Secretary had offered that instead of Russian agricultural bank one of the subsidiaries will be linked to the Swift. It seems Russians were not happy with that and then that became the reasons for their termination from their part. So, in the context of who entered into this agreement in the first place and who is imposing the sanctions, there is a gap clearly. So, while the UN may be justifiably concerned about global food prices and global food security and we talked about the FAO's most recent report on the show earlier indicating how much of an impact actually this war has had on that specific subject. The EU and its allies have a seemingly different perspective on things. Of course, it seems that they are not even ready to understand this particular it seems Russia had the only responsibility to understand the food crisis or the food insecurity in the world and rich European countries do not have any responsibility. They will not lift the sanctions, they will not re-link Russian agriculture bank to the Swift and also they will take a larger chunk of the grain exported from Ukraine after the agreement they will get the benefits of it and yet they will have their policies intact vis-a-vis Russia. So, their part of the bargain is not there. So, that seems to be a quite hypocritical from a Russian point of view or a point of view which is not part of this neutral perspective. Of course and that basically becomes the issue. It is nobody can deny the Europeans also when they talk about rising in food insecurity of course they are also now increasingly being affected because of the idea of the cost of living crisis emerging their working class demonstrating on the ground. Of course, for the first time even the western Europe and in Northern Africa the food insecurity is rising as we discussed when we talked about the Fauer Report. So, yes they are also affected but the effect on the larger global south in particular and African countries which are predominantly as we said before are relying on the grain exports from Ukraine and Russia in European needs to understand that the sanctioning Russia is not hurting Russia as much as it is hurting the poorer countries in Africa and that realization apparently it seems that the UN General Secretary who talks about food insecurity on each every occasion possible was failed to convey to the European Union members and convince them to take this step to address the Russian concerns and that failure of course is a failure of the global diplomacy. It is not a failure of an individual of course. Alright, thank you Agul, I think we will leave it there on this for now except unless maybe you can also broadly just point out to us in case it is not clear again from a neutral perspective does it seem like a further step in a continual process of escalation. See in last few at least weeks if you see there is a escalation from both primarily from the NATO site that Ukrainian talk about Ukrainian becoming a member of course they were not invited fully but that is there that has been raised despite the objections and that being one of the root causes for the war. Then supply of what do you call it cluster bombs despite Russian objections despite the objections raised by majority of the global countries and human rights organizations and if you see today all there was an attack on the bridge which links with Crimea and Russia so there is counter offensive going on there is no initiative for dialogue and all the initiatives created by made by countries in Africa or countries like China and other members of the global community have been shot down by the US and the NATO members. So there is a complete lack of any initiative to find a solution to the conflict and over and above that there is then there are provocative steps taken one after the other. So Russians of course if you see it from them from outside Russians seems to have no other option but to kind of take kind of retaliate in whatever way they can in the same kind of way and also although we are also speaking about an issue which is in some ways connected and also pertains to the European Union so we will ask you to stick around for 30 seconds. The hawkish head of the EU of course Ursula von der Leyen along with Italy's right wing leader Georgia Maloney and Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rut held talks with Tunisian President Kai Said in response to the growing number of refugees and asylum seekers looking to get across the sea and find a better sort of life and liberty in Europe of course that is the promise that is the dream. Abdul given the sort of vibe that you might have felt if you were in the room with these leaders of today what are sort of what are the terms of this new memorandum of understanding between Tunisia and the EU and then we can maybe talk about the whole approach towards this process of migration. And the details are not yet out we don't know the nitty gritty of it but given the experience we have used deals with Libya and it's earlier deal with older deal with Turkey of course Turkey's deal is different in nature but that the basic issue remains the same the Europeans want to discourage or prevent people coming to its shores seeking asylum and for that they are ready to fund whichever country in whatever way possible is ready to willing to do their job of patrolling their borders and that means taking whatever measures possible in violation of whatever human rights we talk about. So exactly that is what has happened if you read the announcement by Wendor Lin and the prime minister or the Italian prime minister all of them have reiterated that part of the 900 plus million euros will go to building a kind of border security arrangement mechanism inside Tunisia that was the primary announcement of course they are also sugar coated this particular aspect of the deal with other for example Tunisia is suffering from economic crisis so they are basically saying that a part of this 900 plus billion euros will go to kind of addressing some of the economic concerns in Tunisia it will also provide that part of the money will go for the re you can say branding or reviving the Tunisian education system primarily the school building and some scholarship for Tunisian students to go to Europe and exchange that is these are the things which have been identified announced but the primary objective remains how to control the flow of migrants from Tunisia across the Mediterranean to Italy in particular Italy for example yesterday or some days few days back issued a statement according to which the number of migrants immigrants to Italy has increased to 75,000 since the beginning of the year in comparison to 31,000 last year the whole year so according to them this is a big flood of migrants coming in Europe and they want to prevent it as much as possible because 900 billion dollars might not be able to help to solve the problem at their end of course that's their thinking so which brings us to the conditions perhaps Abdul and maybe that's most pertinent to talk about under which this sort of wave of migration is happening and what you are referring to the kind of support that these governments the European Union extends to governments that make it more difficult for people to stay to live to earn a livelihood as well as to express whatever it is that they need to in their own countries that is why primarily they are leaving so what is the situation in Tunisia we haven't touched on it for a while that is very important if you see ever since Kaisaid came to power there has been an attempt to and of course this is a diversionary tactics used by most of the rulers across the world to kind of whip up anti-immigrant sentiment in Tunisia and particularly against the immigrants coming from Sub-Saharan Africa there have been reported cases of rise in racial hatred and violence in Tunisia since Kaisaid gave a statement claiming that the migrants from Sub-Saharan Africa coming to Tunisia to change the overall character of Tunisia to make it more of an African country than an Arab country the irony is Tunisia is an African country no matter what Kaisaid thinks anyway so that became despite the fact that this has been opposed by the human rights groups and the left parties inside Tunisia a larger group there has been an increase of violence against immigrants and recently on July 1st week in first week of July hundreds of migrants were pushed out of Tunisia's second largest city and pushed out of in fact Tunisia to the borders of Libya or Algeria and according to the Red Cross there around 600 people have been sheltered by it so you can understand the extent of it that basically the rise of hatred and of course the larger continents economic condition result of the longer periods of colonial and imperial practices inside the continent has created a situation where hundreds of people come to Tunisia and Libya in particular to migrate to Europe and this hatred rising hatred also creates an additional pressure on the people who are not ready to earlier they were not ready to move out of Tunisia they were not willing to go anywhere else at least for now they are forced to kind of take the desperate measure and move out of Tunisia and go to Europe so this push and pull whatever you call it basically creates a situation where hundreds of people die every year by drowning in the Mediterranean sea sometimes starving because they are brought stranded in the sea without any food and any water so the human tragedy is big but Europeans only think about their own immediate concerns which is basically coming of the migrants will mean the quote-unquote economic issues according to their own calculations as you rightly pointed out 900 million dollars could have been used to build infrastructure or build opportunities for these asylum seekers in their own countries but instead of doing that that is more of a cultural more strength in other aspects of their own economy to give who they consider their own people jobs and other opportunities so it's most of a reactionary xenophobic reaction than economic concerns soundly yeah so that is quite obvious and this deal again proves it alright thanks very much Abdul we leave it there for today thanks for setting up our Monday episode of Daily Beebe and finally though not all doom and gloom we also like to throw in a bit of distraction where we can and what better than Wimbledon I guess on this occasion the men's final happened on Sunday and the women's final the day before that on Saturday along with of course doubles and mixed doubles and all the rest of it on the men's side there on both sides of course there are new champions but on the men's side for the first time in over 10 years Novak Djokovic lost a game at centre court and 20 year old Carlos Alcaraz from Spain the reigning world number one is the new Wimbledon champion Sharda Ogre joins us via video conference to talk about both the men and women's tournaments and whether finally we might see a change of guard that we've been waiting for in the sport of tennis for quite a while Sharda back to back episodes of the show that we've had you on I think this is the best we've done in a long time first up the women's side of we look at only singles because of course we have just a short amount of time on the show Marqueta Vandu Sova of the Czech Republic becoming the first unceded player of course in the professional era to win Wimbledon Is it like we've been looking at women's tennis as being the more open and competitive of the two draws at least as far as singles is concerned is this something that has been sort of reiterated and also if you can add a little bit on Ans Jabbo losing again in the final at the last step what that might be like Hi Siddharth Everyone seems to be waiting for Ans Jabbo to win for so many reasons other than the fact that she's an incredibly creative and incredibly watchable player but Marqueta Vandu Sova's story in itself the fact that a year ago she was injured she was walking around with a cast she had wrist surgery it is reflective of the women's game that it's actually far more even spread out the talent and you can see that this is not a top 10 player this is someone from outside the elite ranks of the game but was able to play with such great calmness and confidence and athleticism I think what we always reminded about the women's game when you watch the final is the elevation of athleticism to where it is today Ans Jabbo I think is a very popular player she's a favorite for everyone and like she keeps saying her time will come but in the sense the pressure on her was perhaps what made Vandu Sova play just the most beautiful flowing kind of a game and be able to see her skills and her athleticism and her utter calmness through everything except the last when she was serving for the final but before that she was just completely in control bound to be a bit of I suppose butterflies, jitters whatever you want to call it when you're just almost there but moving ahead to the men's side of things Kalos Alkaraz also you thought might have the same but in that sense he did the opposite right at the end firstly taking a set of Novak Djokovic in a tie break which hasn't happened much this year at least not in the bigs and then sort of in the final set holding his own showing the kind of composure that you're talking about the calmness and of course playing an incredibly athletic and I mean at some points like absolutely ridiculous tennis as well yeah ridiculous tennis was the thing I think he's learned from what happened in his last sort of encounter with Novak Djokovic and a lot of us were discussing about the pressure of playing Djokovic itself you know going by what Yanik Sinha said they're so respectful of the competitor that he's going to face Kalos Alkaraz before the final but he held his nerve and he was able to raise the standard of his game to match that of Djokovic Djokovic made one ginormous error at the start of the I mean unforced error at the start of the of the set he could have gone up to love and then you never know how he goes there but Alkaraz was able to pull everything back and then produced those incredible returns and incredible passing shots and you're thinking that it was like he was ready for the day he was there he has a grand slam title with him but all the boxes that had to be that you thought that couldn't be ticked of Novak Djokovic playing against him he did all of that and in fine style and I think other than and just competed both of them for a change not for a change sort of competed with a great deal of respect for each other as well you know age and all the rest of it that went it was a lovely final to watch so yeah it was indeed a great final to watch and which you know it's something that again we said we would touch on so we will does it now indicate that this generation there's so many young players in the mix whether it's Holger Roener of course Alkaraz himself so many other young guys 20, 21 22, 23 is there now a chance of like looking at more of them maturing and actually it being that generational shift that we talked about so often I know the generational shift we've been waiting for for almost in one or two generations literally a token of somebody but I think Alkaraz has literally broken away from this pack and now everyone has to catch him even though sort of the old guys will be around that is I think Alkaraz he's won two grand slams and the one that he won against Djokovic I think this time is a big breakthrough you've seen people put in really good performances in say an earlier round victory or in another tournament you know in an ATP event but for Alkaraz to pull this up at a slam he said they never mind the new generation I'm now beat me I'm the person to be beaten and he's just 20 years old it'll be a huge everyone all the superstars all the gen next guys have to not catch up with him and play the kind of game that's there because he set the standard say for the next I don't know how many years now we kept thinking it was 10 but the big three have made it last almost 15 you know so there's no saying Thanks very much Alkaraz of course at just a little over 20 becoming the third youngest to win the men's single title at Wimbledon after of course 17 year old Boris Becker and the legendary Bjorn Borg. Thank you Sharda always a pleasure talking to you and also with that we'll bring to a close this episode of the show thank you for watching today's show as always we also invite you to head to our website peoplesispatch.org for details on these stories and all of the other work we do and also follow us on social media for regular updates we'll be back same time same place tomorrow until then stay safe goodbye