actually, the things have become tragic and all the time since a nation began. and the cutting prices have the making of a grown out and dangerous confrontation between russia and the west, particularly nato. and as we all know, the crisis is already affecting the global economy. with high energy prices and supply chain disruptions said to fuel inflation and slow economic growth, and india cannot skip these medications. and of course, the larger issue is that the rest is snapping. it's post war war ties with moscow. despite the risk of meeting strategic instability globally, in fact, the u. s. live response appeals in dec affecting regime change in moscow eventually . so this is the critical moment, the national nations. and i think they have been miscalculations both by brother

and gotten and also by the western block. well, i think nato countries would surely say, miscalculations would be made in delhi. why? when albania in the united states had the chapter 7 motion water down to chapter 6, did the prime minister moody say he wouldn't support it? why did they not supported when there's a time of war? and certainly here the view is that any refusal to vote with washington and nato prolongs the misery of ordinary ukrainians. what would have been here, chief by condemning russia and damning a country for the sake of condemning it doesn't advance foreign policy interest yet never. and even in the boss, condemn united states for meaning, iraq or libya or any other country. condemnation is stark part of it in different

se, in any case, russia and the united states are both close friends of india. to walk into medic tightrope. that's to do a balancing act which are becoming, making me this is called given the fact that what you're seeing is that front of a nuclear war that's going to seriously compound interest. strictly the challenges also affect its close defense statement. moscow example of, given the financial tension said the vestos in both in russia. holland. yeah, be what the weapons it buys from russia. there's just one or many things. it is also investing in russian oil and gas sector implants to invest in the russian far east. all of these plans defy,

given these mounting sanctions against russia. so for india, this is, this crisis really is complicating it's diplomacy. and also it's pursuit of long terms credited interest complicating it or speeding up the adoption by india of alternative methods of financing. as opposed to say the brussels may swift system and others. now, india can use new methods of financing. often discussed in bricks meetings, shang i cooperation, organization meetings, non align, move would meetings, so many trans national meetings that have occurred over the past. what 50 years? 70 since world war 2, you ask the right and i think by exiting the system or weaponized thing,

an energy pipeline. and by cutting rochelle off from west and let institutions, the us is actually undermining those wedding institutions. because frankly, will be forced to truth alternatives or develop alternatives. so russia example will have to trade in rebel and ruby as it did bring the solid ice. so any guidance situation? well, have to be met with innovative methods. so i don't expect the russia and the relationship to snap because of the financial fractions, require

a lot of work, both in utility and must go to maintain in relationship. that's why, for so many decades, in fact, it has, it has solidified. despite the profound changes in the world, in the past half a century, that relationship has been seen in new delhi. he has a relationship with a tried and tested trend, but at the same time. and i says, has also become increasingly important in. so how does india balance to important relationships in a new cornwall? that's going to be a huge challenge for policy makers in new delhi. well, some would say it's very easy and your hesitancy is because as you know her, he well, because you see china is a big adversary, that it may necessitate closer ties between your foe. he across the valley between pakistan and india,

and china. and that's why you're hesitant about this closer relationship with russia without the u. s. and nato countries involved because it will necessitate closer relationships with china. that's your problem. and surely add to the blink and the former west exec consultant who's now secretary of state that alone jake sullivan. realize full well that there are dangers of moving russia closer to currencies other than the dollar. and his thought on par made the calculation banner from the dollar while you brought in china, which is so important. look at the international crisis that was created even before fortran launched the invasion of ukraine. yet how many people in the world know that for the past 22 months, india has faced it. chinese aggression, it carries aggression and roaming up to 200000 chinese troops.

that invasion, aggression. what do we call? it began in april 2020. when try these forces furtively encroach on several key border areas in the northern was the indian region of the dock. since then the military build ups have only escalated creating the danger. i'll pay a full scale wall. well, we, we invite the chinese masters in the un united nations, but basically what, so your point and the point of many in the leads in a, in the, or is they don't want us to abandon its relationship with russia because they went to russia alongside them in their attack on china, russia and india had fairly similar views on stability in asia or,

or your asia. and that bilateral relationship has stood the test of time chinese kelly, an important factor in this relationship, even in this present military crisis. and india, as based with the russians, have been it social help for india, especially in helping to fortify its offenses. so that really underscores the importance of russia for india. i don't think you can afford to see that relationship degrade in any manner. but i wrote it clea, the pakistani prime minister iran guy was in moscow at the time that we put in was clearly planning sending the troops into ukraine. brazil is not being that supportive of nato countries in washington bricks never been stronger than that.

now, given that brazil india and india is perceived enemy nuclear um, fellow enemy, about your son, since they all seem to be against the nato and the u. s. line. well, but india is in the unique position of having to nuclear adversary's china and focused on that actually close alliance. so i would say strategic triangle in which in this means try 9 and pakistan and given that star reality. and given the fact that greg increasingly has come under the chinese shadow, india has to be very cautious in relying on pricks as a institution. the bricks has value,

but bricks is currently not a credible alternative to other international institutions. but a very much less than that breaks, but so there are going to exaggerate the importance of bricks. the fact is that a country like india, given this security predicament, has to deal with the realities that it faces. what, what is, what do you expect the u. s and nato to do to india because of its lack of support, arguably for the civilians dying in the streets of ukraine. well, has the american president spoken, even though word on the chinese potter information against india has any less than the head of government supported india in the current crisis that in that conference, usually chinese aggression answer is no. so why should be supporting

though they still stand against russia? if you have a dog in the fight, nothing from taking a position that could undermine its relationship with moscow. you know, the same time india has done not seem to under coverage. we bought a relationship but with washington and they are people in the state department of set on said off the record to the media, the understand india has got. lemme and the dollar my. so why abstain from the vote in the security council? i don't, i don't see how the us auditor i went to take revenge on india just because in the apps the from, from a lot in the us security council for his brother lading. i'll stop you there more from the national security specialist and emeritus professor of strategic

strategies at new daily's set of policy research after this break. ah oh, when i want shown the wrong one, i'll just don't move any new world just to shape out disdain. because the attitude and engagement equals the trail. when so many find themselves worlds apart, we choose to look for common ground. ah,

not another while you while div easy while furnace us. ah. yeah. do you have one slide? yes. south. yeah. thrashing a south. there was actually teeth, but then your duck awesome boys now watch them up all mutable. upright pizza is emily, apple's gary, of whom shall i vicious kim's room. she thought, did you say the y fi, ella? a bill come? yes, my thought or change in the again your fortune very up my bill at about this morning. just financial aah.

dish welcome back. i'm still here with professor brown much laney, international security specialist and americans professor of strategic studies, a new daily center for policy research. so india attacks shine or over perceived un violations un resolution violations, but refuses to attack russia after the secretary general of the united nations said it violated international law. well, in yeah, never attacked china over. why did any resolution criticize china for violating bilateral agreements, binding bilateral agreements, of course, menu violent violate while it bilateral agreement to wiley,

the national law. because bilateral agreements are bought and partial of international law. yeah. not even un resolutions. and yet, with russia, you won't vote with international law or against moscow. well, if you look at the history of this century, you know, have been so many multiple foreign military invasions of sovereign states in this century alone. the 2000 and began with the us invasion of afghanistan then followed an invasion which was monday by a un resolution while the, the, you and have become increased marginalized and human stamp of approval. or anything mean human kind of a pro can come even ran

a country flow to international law. for example, the us invasion of iraq and occupational the country using the protects, that there were weapons of mass destruction in iraq have the human stamp of approval. but that'll make a legitimate international law, s b, c. it is powerful against the policy and policy against the powerful that's the harsh reality might makes right is still very much intact and it was century example. today, the western block talks about upholding the rules based order. what, what to order is back. the fact is that those look at in order others make the routes for the world, have been a trade or weapon ising energy weapon being served is certainly not

uploading. enrolled space stronger. well, one can mention syria canister on iraq, livia and so on. but then what the view of prime minister moody is 2 wrongs make a right therefore don't vote with the u. s. at the security council. as i mentioned, it never, never fits an adjustment on any countries, aggression, a case in the country has never condemned any military animation. sorry and condemns packers for it. condensed by august on the use of terrorism as an instrument of state policy against india, against our guy miss was india, the victim of that kind of use of terrorism. but certainly,

india has demonstrated in moral judgment on the military actions of any bar that's never been part of indian diplomacy. do you think the united states force or what was going on as it pulled out of afghanistan after it's longest war? and his defeat in afghanistan, that that's why it was boring weapons in the ukraine ahead of what putin says was a provoke provocation. and what nato in the u. n says, was his illegal invasion on the garbage tons defeated humiliation. united states was a watershed moment and it certainly but by there on the defensive, and he tried to divert attention. he made some important strategic miscalculations just the way we can have made some sort of

different calculations. first miscalculation on the part of binding was that he could use the thread of sanctions to deter russia from in reading ukraine. the problem is that the us true will use of sanctions as blanket instrumental sanctions by repeatedly slapping sanctions on russia for the past 8 years or so. so the object of preventing russia from a meeting ukraine failed miserably, and miscalculation was not to take walton's threat of an invasion seriously. by giving him the security services they demanded security or trans than the us. and they don't want to turn ukraine. it with the front line launch pad against russia by, by deploying offensive weapons on new created inside almost 3 months or so. put

a short to, to guarantee it is wanting to ignored repeatedly. and there was also a bottomless competition. my view on the, on, on the part of putting in international relations. you can buy mounting a credible liquid credit achieve an object without the need to actually execute the correct. where you put a long term military against ukraine. compel the us to abandon its policy of native creek to russian borders. he woke up the world, the dangers of natal expansionism commentators, even in the us, we can argue whether expanding and needed to russia borders and thereby prompting russia to militarize. was an american interest. in fact, as you know, the military build up on nuclear waters kept the us on the ropes with by them

wanting for days on end of the nation was coming. it's sort of sustaining that threat. putting decided to execute that even though controlling the outcome of the warm one second launch is literally impossible. so i think he could have a more, a sustaining. that's right. this is sort of actually launching the nation. obviously, moscow appears to believe that the cause of actions are the right ones and risking all is the way forward in the united states thinks that the united states think that there must be, even if it's perhaps risk of nuclear war. the ability for ukraine to join nato, that's where the urban union also firmly believes. so, i mean, the point here is the rights of ukraine to be able to join nato at all costs,

few believe fuel the nato believe that ukraine should be admitted to make it to intimately divide in highly corrupt functional state in the eyes of many natal and there was a chance of, of ukraine being admitted to natal itself is sort of a switching fresh air security concerns. and the most concerns could have been addressed to the war after all, russia is not main lo challenger, the main loan challenger is china, which is seeking to supplant the us as the global hedge of on us as the us already said, sorry to interrupt them, but obviously, the largest on $850000.00 soldiers in the russian army, but european union nations,

including germany, ascending in masses of weapons now into ukraine. do you think they think in washington of nato headquarters in brussels at b, a. u parliament in brussels and in strasburg, that ukraine can beat the red army as they pour in these weapons. if not, why would they pour in the weapons? the strategy is very clear now that they persuade not only containment to point all against russia. they also crank to enter their kindness on to point all against russia, just the way they in sneered russian in many poses and the congress done in a ministry quagmire in the 1980s by launching their biggest covert operation in history. now, in addition to the high sanctions that boast on russia,

they are looked in, it's least seeking to and, and trap russia. it's similar military. my in ukraine, by boring. huge with the sources. by arming the resistance, the insurgency, they want to bleed russia. that's the strategy, or whether they succeeded, not one of the strategies when it can. in fact, binding that congress for an additional $6400000000.00 for wide arms and other military id ukrainian forces, whether they are armed forces, the resistance forces, insertions that says carrying amount of money that biden is willing to warranty, no grain. those are certainly the figures being thrown around hell in capitol hill

when it comes to the budget then. so apart from all these countries in the global south using turning away from the dollar to get round the sanctions and so on. why do you think politicians in the russian duma wanted their boots in to support the recognition of don yet skimmed her hands. her hand pushed boot in whoever's he wanted it as well to act in this way. if you believe it, sir, you appear to believe it's a catastrophic geopolitical mistake, let alone it's illegality under international law. well, recognizing the tool trickery of republics could have been seen as bato mounting, credible threat that could have posed the un and nato and concede what russia was asking back to actually

launch an invasion. was something completely different that tragic and what are the moment or 2 they could get worse without cautioning prudence on both sides. but why would this such a mistake? is this a low cost strategy? but it's very clear for us what the military objectives are in relation to ukraine. what do you think the chief, because, as you can see from the line to the tags, the 3 lines of attack that russia has mounted in ukraine, it starts seeking to occupy the entire country. what are the military objectives of food? is something difficult to guess? he's certainly not taking an extra hold of ukraine lease in terms of the military

operations so far. but my biggest concern is this, as a history of this is the only last rates. foreign military invasions have decent life sovereign states. and as there are syria lithia on demonstrate, such innovations have triggered an ending while and, and bloodshed and russia invasion, and the u. s. plan to om ukrainians to believe russia threatening to turn your credit into assyria or libya. this will have major implications both for russian security as, as well as well. europe and security professor brown and chain amy, thank you so much. that's it for the show will be back on saturday. 76 here to the day since then you have 5 minutes to winston churchill addressed us making israel don couldn't speech where he warned against the spread of soviet communism until then keep in touch with social media and let us know which country you think is the

biggest aggressive ah ah with

what we've got to do is identify the threats that we have. it's crazy even foundation, let it be an arms race. he's on offense. very dramatic development only personally and getting to resist. i don't see how that strategy will be successful. very difficult time, time to sit down and talk ah

ah, as it rushes military operation in ukraine enters its 7th day explosions, have been reported at a key of tv tower and the hock of region. i'm it of the other side of the conflict. terrific destruction of homes in the aftermath of a battle in the dumbass region. grey village has come under the control of the guns militia. and if you politicians demand, even harsher sanctions against russia, after the block decides to ban r t and cut some russian back out of the international transaction systems with. but there are voices in the block opposing the establishment approach to the ukraine. crisis here has direct ukraine into these confrontation. he will be smart as you do so so that ukraine could develop. it can not be any with.