on its head you know and my view of that process did lead to a huge amount of liberalisation by everyone the developing countries came on board a meeting later but they certainly came on board and you know they develop in countries today are incredibly open perhaps less open then the united states but certainly in over them is quite open actually so but now they have turned it around and we are saying that and you know if your tapes are higher than mine then i am going to reverse my past liberalization which i had actually done in response to your liberal a sufficient that is a different game you know so this was the exactly the opposite of the spirit of this a process as we have used in the past now so far trump has been able to get his way partially due to his bare knuckle tactics do you think there is any leverage that the rest of the world has when negotiating trade with this very pushy america is still carries a huge dad could that be used as a tool of persuasion. part of the opposition really also has to come from

within the united states all saw because you know when you talk of let's esteem an aluminum diary of their team member of industries that use both steel and aluminum and in so far as. their costs of production are concerned they have now gone up countries also need to be you know more tactical. you know that. the element in steve that is announced. reactions of countries were to seek exemptions but instead i think you know the one they have to squarely they end of rather than go for it is star seeking exemptions for individually for them since they have been working licht really kind of work against the imposition of that is themselves pressure has to come in more from. the industrial side particularly getting the u.s. industry is to begin to respond is very to the damage they are actually getting and

we have down the road from the u.s. tariffs now i'm arrogant like to say that every cloud has a silver lining and i suppose in this case they may be quite a number of them i know that there is a lot of happiness or grievances when it comes to china it's a canonic behavior not only in asia but in other parts of the world i wonder if you believe the american trade stance on on china may create any collateral advantages either for india or perhaps for others. i mean in principle you could argue that. if this leads. to the speeding up of china overdrawing from certain markets because remember the medically with the read is raising in china china is already been drawing from certain markets particularly the labor intensive products not any protectionist. measures by the united states can lead to a speedy withdrawal of the china fronts on the markets and that can open up. and it

is for the other countries but that's a sort of you know not not the ideal way to create opportunities i believe actually in general you open markets and the opportunities are to be created through competition through better more efficiency greater productivity and so forth now india also meant a trade deficit with china and its quite significant one around fifty one billion dollars in two thousand and seventeen and while the two countries side an agreement to achieve a trade balance by two thousand and nineteen i think it's fair to say that the chinese have allowed themselves some procrastination on that front do you expect these tensions with the united states to maybe to make beijing a little bit more responsive to issues like that and others simply because it needs the support. in its trade standoff with washington well that's that's very lately to happen i think you know this is this is very normal kind of outcome of

letters like these that if china is under huge pressure from the united states then it will be more conciliatory to some of the other countries with whom it may have been less conciliatory in the past prime minister more they had visited china and there was no official agenda but he spent about more than two days in china today leaders spent quite a bit of time together so you know clearly there is there is. movement in that direction. and go i think you know one has to know the details of what is being talked about behind the scenes well and i think one of the news that was leaked after that informal simon between prime minister mori and president xi was that china actually pledged to increase its imports of indian sugar so i guess we can take that as an indication of china trying to sweeten its relationship and its trade with india both literally and figuratively anyway professor we have to take

a short break now. but we will be back in just a few moments stay tuned. for a world cup twenty eight team coverage we've signed one of the greatest goalkeepers of all time but there was one more question by the way was going to be our coach. guys i know you are nervous he's a huge star among us and the huge amount of pressure you have to go i mean eight percent of the poll we do and do the great british you are the rock at the back nobody gets past you we need you to get the ball going let's go. alone. and i'm really happy to join the to for the two thousand and three and world

cup in russia meet the special one come all sorts of cliches me to just say the review beyond the team's latest edition to make up a bigger certainly better jersey book. welcome back to worlds apart with our been put that great professor of economics at columbia university professor you've been mostly complimentary of the government for its efforts to lower inflation and spur economic growth but you fold it for reverting to the policy of import substitution and sort of privileging domestic consumption of exports why do you think the expert modelling. comes out under so

much pressure in china but also in our countries like germany like a number of european countries would be good for india at this point of time. in the human interaction played economist i believe in competitive advantage and therefore i believe that you know we should split the country should specialize in the products where its costs are nor and. in return it can then import the products which it produces at higher costs when we do import substitution we are doing exactly the opposite we are going to. stopping the imports of what we do mystically cannot produce at a low cost and we have therefore encouraging higher cost production. that will eventually also impact our exports in a so it really goes against the competitive advantage principle well i understand your competitiveness argument but i think there is also you know

a security argument there if you don't maintain a production capacity for basic goods aren't you exposing yourself to higher geopolitical risks because you know that sanctions and you know the denial of trade has been used as not only as a geo political tool but also as a tool of regime change do you think india is totally immune to those kind of risks but do you see the that is that india actually mean walked this was not in response to a need to it's against india. or this article actually those are there is india this a the it to to to introduce purely for imports of solution reasons saw you know. the context was actually quite different but also coming to your specific question more squarely the world is much larger you see when sing one country imposes sanctions it doesn't close the rest of the world for you and therefore.

still have the rest of the world with which you can still trade now speaking about sanctions correct me if i'm wrong but from what i understand the issue of u.s. tariffs is all secondary importance to india because it is now faced with with the sanctions related to the capsule legislation the countering america's adversaries through sanctions act reach for example applies directly to russia india would be sanctioned as the law stands now egypt would be sanctioned for doing any trade or any significant trade with russia when there especially when it comes to weapons and yet india has been trading with russia when it comes to weapons for many many decades do you think do you have any concerns that india may be punished for what the united states sees as allegedly russia's bad behavior you know the. diplomacy cannot disregard any contingency and in any possibility so one has to

take that into account having said that. remember that india is also the buyer of very large volume of. military equipment from the united states saw this game can be played by two sides to meet me if it is played by. refusing to forces a sale of. equipment it hurts both sides but at the same time you know india is not a small by any country it is a large country and you know going forward it's going to be a significantly larger country you know in another ten years and we're five six trillion third largest economy in the world and therefore i think the united states will also have to take into account. if such move is taken that india can potentially also stop buying the military equipment from the united states now i know that the u.s. secretary of defense james mattis have asked congress national for

a. the security of waiver for india simply because they understand that india is in no position to. implement this legislation because seventy percent of its weapons as far as i know are of russian origin so you cannot change doubt overnight it's a huge investment that it was made over many decades and yet from what i understand medicine is request to congress has been denied where do you go from there i think the unit ultimately you know the long standing tradition of the united states is that it is a pragmatic country and every law how it is implemented is extremely important there are gender movies out at all and working around any law and so i mean i remain completely hopeful that the united states does see india as the conduit to china in asia region and be you know the very effective change of terminology to in-door pacific. from asia pacific is indicative of that recognition

so so i personally remain quite optimistic that even we found out so that in the access to the russian equipment. in terms of maintenance and so forth is maintained i know that the media has a long track record of defying american sanctions i think you did that back in one thousand seventy four in one thousand nine hundred eighty do you think it's going to be easier this time around especially given that it's not only india but i think also vietnam turkey indonesia a number of countries that seem to be going to have with. russian the weapons purchases and seemingly defying this kind of legislation among all these countries india remains the largest most important and so any serious impact that happens on india's ability to actually defend and be a part of the. work that the united states wants to have. in.

i think is that consideration is extremely important so i personally still think that the united states will need to find a way around the legislation. on the margins of sales may get impacted but it cannot be implemented in a way that it seriously actually impacts the ability of india to be a part of this defense bill what the united states wants to have now i personally see it as a bit of a paradox of the american power structure when the defense policy of the world's second most populous countries which is india is being held hostage to some senators you know in new jersey or a club i wonder how is it perceived in india the fact that any given country would . attempt at least to tell you who to do business with and who not to do business with. countries grow bigger. they see that. the

orly's a quid pro quo kind of place and certainly prime minister more they has built many many bridges in his forty years. you know he has gone to some fifty five different countries to build his bridges but he's also tough i think in national interest if push comes to shove he does assert will assert we saw that you know that. india stood his ground on climate change treaty that is agreement so i think you know this is a game of cooperation but with. a national interest that at the center of the policy and also independence which india is known for and i think brian's for more than a fabulous job of. doing that partly by his outreach i think you know it has been an unprecedented leader in this respect you know in terms of his outreach to the entire global community of leaders. now the legislation relates not only to

russia but also to iran to reach in two thousand and seventeen was india's third largest supplier of crude oil and the station on iran is a little bit different because they have ministration the trauma administration is actually how banned on implementing those sanctions you've been talking about prime minister morris ability to reach out but do you think he will stand ground when it comes to iran as well because the trumpet administration seems to be very serious when it comes to its intention to cut iran off international trade but we do need to be found out but you know what that translates into is much higher price of crude for india and for everybody else unless we begin to see much less a place coming out of russia and maybe also some from the united states as well. so that's a challenge. india has had obviously longstanding relations with iran but this is

a road that india has been. on before. when we have to see what kinds of compromises have to be made but. clearly you know that that also is a challenge for india now from what i understand it's not only about buying oil from iran but it's also about big infrastructure projects like for example the international north south transport corridor reach new delhi sees as an alternative to china's belden growth initiative and a key to success of that project is the. port in iran so we are talking here about not only you know the current indian economy but it also its a geo political ambition its regional ambition do you think there is any scope do you think there is any possibility for india reconsidering its role in the region given that the costs of dealing with iran are now so much higher but this is very i think prime minister we need to negotiate. david the united states as well to see

you know of these other projects not infected. as far as i understand you know currently the sanctions are lifted to trade but if they also came back the cooperation on matters like these on investments this something that given the need to negotiate and. is in its own muster. and they have no doubts that the prime minister is very much up to the task now you've been so far very polite and. diplomatic in your characterization of what the united states and certainly india but let me push you just a little bit further because especially when it comes to these infrastructure projects it seems that. it is actually in the best american interests you know india trying to project itself as a as a rival of china as a counterweight perhaps of russia as somebody who wants to bring stability to

afghanistan and central asia all of that is supposedly in america's interest and yet it seems that the united states is only doing it more difficult for india to country that it's actively been courting do you take that as the united states simply not thinking through all the consequences or perhaps not caring about those consequences yet. there is certainly some element of that that you know the consequence of perhaps not being thought through hard enough but some of it may also be posturing you see the president president trump really sort of you know coming from the business world believes in. cutting a good deal for himself and he has perhaps spent the past presidents his predecessors were not tough enough so he's trying a different paths but i'm sure he is also a rational individual. and is after the interests of the united states so he is

obviously has the most difficult balancing act to perform as you say when you push other countries such as india who are potentially allies. it. can adversely impact your own objectives and so therefore it is a very difficult balancing act and i have no doubt that you know in the end. some more sensible position. or the new equality i'm really. would. hopefully be able to reach at the minimal cost certainly the united states is trying to change the existing at will agree i'm so when it goes i think the mystery seem well professor we have to leave it there really appreciate your time today our viewers can keep this. conversation going on our social media pages as for me hope to see you again same place same time here on the worlds apart.

generally speaking mr trump's unilateralist notably the unilateralism which we saw with regards to iran which we also saw with regards to the paris agreement regarding climate change which we saw with regards to the american embassy in jerusalem all these he lateral decisions i challenge from my point of view the quality of our transatlantic relations.

i. know messi and cristiano ronaldo are not out of the world cup on the same day as a lot of what beats portugal in the last sixty. two time world champions argentina are beat for the three by friends. i.

pad. french fans go wild as they celebrate the victory both in russia and back on. the bed so that's my job so i can run back in flight. these are. for the latest on these stories and all of the action from the world cup team had r t dot com coming up going underground allegations of war crimes committed by nato and if you're watching in the u.k. nick scott says in the ongoing a probe into the deadly grunfeld. we're going underground on british armed forces day and in this special edition we're

joined by pulitzer prize winning journalist hirsch who exposed nato nation war crimes of the military industrial complex from abu ghraib prison in the anglo-american war in iraq to the mean massacre site hersh has exerted a damning skepticism of the official line did the syrian government really use chemical weapons what was the truth behind the osama bin laden assassination what connects nato nations to isis and al qaeda and should we believe to resume about the poisoning of the script files in england his new book reporter a memoir is out now thanks so much for going back and going underground why you rather than dick cheney there you were writing a book on dick cheney. and the source issue i mean what happened is. obama in the balmy years there was he tightened very much on leaks and dissent in particular in the intelligence community put cia guy in jail there were people in the white house

somebody was jailed also privately without public disclosure there was a sense that obama really didn't like leaks and so i had done a book on cheney i've written a lot about cheney for the new yorker during you know after nine eleven and there was a story a book to write and when i began giving chapters to people involved they said the appropriate you know if it's just going to be published because they would get in trouble they're professional intelligence people and military people the ones i deal with they take an oath of office to the to the constitution and not to any particular president so i just had to i just couldn't publish the book and put them in jeopardy it would put them in jeopardy would would make it almost impossible for me that the chick about me is that. i don't give up people i meet people they they don't go after my people they don't know who they are i put nothing in a computer i write all my interviews in longhand and so i just felt if i if i publish stuff over their opposition and they got prosecuted i would not sleep at

night and be also not be able to do the kind of reporting i'm still doing if anyone reading this memoir about so much military action of one kind or another they shouldn't be a great event that you said recently that we're in war with the united states is at war in seventy six countries now let alone the wars you clinical in this what i said was that there's seventy six places in the in the world where the americans are involved with kinetically with weapons and it based it was based on actually a public study done by an institute at brown university called the wats institute and i knowing some of the people involved in the study it's a lot of stuff that we have a big special forces community that are active particular in africa and a lot of places i think the public knows very little about it i don't think this our my president is been briefed on any. but i don't think he would he's not interested in oh you doesn't know about it i know there's concern about some people in the military and high up in the military in my government in washington what are

these guys doing who's in control there's a lack of control in among the special forces they've just gotten and many of them are driven. with the idea that they are on a crusade that they're that they're the knights of malta fighting the infidels in the fourteenth century or thirteenth century ice really crazy stuff and so i don't think when i hear military special operations command say about mali here's what happened four guys died how i'm sorry i i just think this probably much more to this story i think there's much more to our presence there but it's very hard to get to that stuff lots of opportunities for reporters is may be you thinking in any way that this memoir already being reviewed quite widely favorably and helps in defending you from some quite extraordinary ad homonym attacks on your recent reporting oh it's you know the only thing that happened in my recent reporting is. it was fine when bush and cheney when dick cheney and george bush were in charge

but want to bomb i came in he was the not the white knight if you will of the black knight ok it's african-american and it just changed it and it is just you know that's the way it is the stories that would have been fine in the days of bush and cheney suddenly were you know not getting published and people were complaining that i am always on the complaining about anonymous sources as if every day the new york times you can't pick up the newspaper and find the lead story based on anonymous sources it's just part of our business you can't name people in particular the stuff i do know i you know when i first did the middle i story really master story in one nine hundred sixty nine the first thing i remember there was a poll from the i think for university of minnesota fifty four percent of the people didn't believe it and forty six and among my peers you know eighty percent didn't believe in. you know i have to expand on that me a nice way because it's not on any british curriculum as stated a miniature in the united states you know how it is it's when i was growing up i born in one thousand thirty seven by the time i got into my twenty's and thirty's

the world war one oh my god i don't think i knew about world war one his fields of poppies and hemingway novels so it's not surprising to me that the generation doesn't know what happened the lies vietnam has disappeared in america pretty we know it wasn't a good war for us i'm sure there are still five pages of textbooks but there was a period when universities all had special courses on the war but that was twenty thirty years ago you and i were too old buddy we're all people i'm a much younger yeah but you know look i know great here but you must have to. leave me but if we go. mentioned it. the medium as it still resonates the name of the judge with maybe historians of vietnam you tell in this book the story of trying to find sources and witnesses just describe what you go into there and why i just got a tip about it and you know i covered it's not as if i came from nothing i've been a police reporter in chicago and let me tell you about being a police reporter in one thousand nine hundred sixty wanted to go to go it was you

learned a couple things you learned all about the weakness as my first job was copied we're working for a news agency to cover crimes and police ace's and so what i learned was you could do anything you want as a reporter was great fun you're on the street you're reporting about fires and murders but if a cop kills a black person that's off the books you know you know no matter what your words are going to be taken and if if you ever get into the police relationship with the mafia and you go you know this is sam giancana some of those names some of your people know the famous mafioso as you could you could you can see some guy in the street with fourteen bullets in a downtown area where those clubs are controlled by the mob and it would be reported as that automobile accident and so i learned right away that there was tyranny in the world. and that there were things you could do there was self censorship to stop shooting i had a great time i learned a lot about i covered fires i learned more about racism that i thought i would but i also knew there were there was as i say tyranny there were certain things you

could not get the chicago police department was operating in the world on its own things have changed a lot since then but what a lesson that was in sixty sixty one i want me army i work for a united press international i cover the legislature in peter south dakota town of ten thousand i was a chicago kid never lived in a small city i then worked in chicago and i was sent to washington covered the war from the pentagon learned to hate the war but the point i'm making is by the time i got to the meat life story had been in the business eight or nine years and so when i got a tip about somebody shooting up a village you've got to read before you write so i used to i was not about watching reading the new york times coverage of the war and then i read the french the french journalist and bernard fall there was a couple wonderful french journalists who wrote about the fall of france india being fool in one nine hundred fifty four and so i read a lot and so i and there was muscle tribunals was very important although everybody in america said burton russel's he hates.