and bought it and concrete, security interests and threats to those. you know, i think interest. what we have to understand is that increasingly we are living in them multiple know, in a multiple word garden crease which are far full. have this spheres of security, influence or want this seems to be areas around them which are critical to the manage all of their security perceptions. once you understand this, then again, perhaps god try and understand the more you wish to be. and i think rush, i was fortunate intervention. great, i say, unfortunate because the building and toward it has led to

a great deal of damage and destruction. it's led to loss of lives. and it is fundamental or transcription of a sovereign country. so to that extent, rochelle stands gullible, but it did ramos in the history. it is low, black and white, let it. i'm the ones that are shades of gray, and we have to see where they are today. the accused are as guilty as the accuser. well, ambassador, let me ask you specifically about that, because whenever i talk to american officials, they always make the case that the russians are dangerous paranoia that puts in lost his marbles or that he is a psychotic. magdalen many moscow maliciously distorts the intentions and nature of nato. i understand that you know,

the mental health professional but who version of reality you find more to be more rooted in the facts on the ground and in the realities in the norms of what in geo politics. you see a diplomat and i have been a member of this problem. and now in london politics, i have a pity that you should never judge a larger issue of the vin since the 1st little demonized fish off. you may have a perception, a walked on there. trump was like, you may have a perception, a walk precedent is like, but there are individuals who are crying and sure within a given them some stances, what is best for their national security?

so i, i don't believe in it, dr. and i don't endorse and i don't accept this attempt of trying to show you who as some kind of of megalomania who is, who is beyond the bill of rational thinking. let's get out of that debate. so we have to now seeing the overall circumstances analyze and then try to see what the solutions can be. speaking about those overall circumstances, 5 weeks into this operation, russia and the west still seed and starkly different terms for the west is an actual unprovoked aggression with absolutely no antecedents did for russia. it's a bad a horrible i would even say, but inevitable last last resort. means all why protecting what it

considers to be insecurity, interest you have the benefit of well, i don't want to go and do a graphical distance. do you think those visions of reality do you think those perceptions of the world and of security concerns? you think that could be somehow reconciled. so at some point the grill world balance became a skew. the berlin wall gemini, real night in common for section it signaled a defeat of communist soviet union and the. ready war so back to can and so the perception grew not unfounded, that it has become a world in which the united states and its allies in particular made to

have become the real custodian of what is good for this world and what is not. and in that capacity, i think what a considerable period of time the united states act to lead, lead out the rule of the song, create global police. and the various moves that vicious to applied to other nations who act in response to what the perceived to be their security and chris, those rules, america for it is not applicable to them. so it could with impunity go into iraq on the basis of a suspicion that iraq has weapons of mass destruction. there was no legitimacy to that action. united states felt that as this so claimed

custodian a, what is good for the global ordered that mirrors are separate, you know what, the, what it should be. it can do what it was to live as long as somebody has bought a new country casa, was created, and most important, the expansion off the united states, and made of wood out toward off what expansion or bring means to other good with respect. it's not like this issue rose. yes. today i mentioned was we didn't send back in 2007 and already and then the unit security conference and many other occasions russian was sounding is displeasure. it was just explaining it agreement with that strategy. pretty straightforward terms. and i understand that americans,

whenever i had talked to them, you know, like they are very forgiving of themselves. they always sort of appeal to the best intentions and then some mistakes would be made along the way. so they wanted, what's beth for iraq? and it's a 1000000 people happen to be killed because of that. well, you know, that's, that's the, that's what happened. essentially, it's not that, well, that's the way history and all that. but when it comes to rush, it's not like this is something that they weren't really aware of because russia was very, very, very persistent in trying to bring that to that attention. why on earth, when they hear to that, even for their own sake, because if they look at what is happening in their world and even the american actions that they have to just that comes back to her, them as well. i mean, it's not so much an issue. all i really do for me. i just don't understand the lack of pragmatism here for the essential one understood. and i think all the while

were specially in europe need to think about is that off of the, of all of the bullet. subsequently a new architecture of europe on certain basic principles which respects the legit to much security and geopolitical concerns of all major problems. i don't think that will negotiate some of that. i think even america middle for just not mr. city. and the apprehensions that russia expressed about just unilateral expansion of lead boundaries, better free an influence on what is the military hooping. we must understand that need to is not some kind of democracy come, it is

a 1000000 regrouping which has provisions today hostile action against anyone else who to not a part of the order to. so the relentless east expansion of made good. the read it under been the off, russia was bottled through walk a reaction in my view. at some point, i'm not saying this justifies the division of grid. i'm trying to give a perspective to it. and i think america and need to, and the list and general trends that they could get away with actions because russia was a diminished power and would continue to accept a walk. were obviously trips to own perception of sphere influence of security. and by the way, it was not always an innocent expansion. by that,

i mean countries. i went in, you grid. there was a 2040 countries of frequencies we did. but there is some evidence of pity that though the west was listed in the all troy of one leader of your grade. and his replaced one by some one more for us to more amenable to more inclined toward the west. we have to take a very short break right now, but we'll be back in just a few moments. ah ah, ah ah

. ah vicky with

with that you didn't yet did you buy the wall oxy? yeah, i ah ah welcome back to the park with a lot of our, my career engine diplomat and form a member of permanent mission to the united nations ambassador before the break me just talking about the international system and how during certain historical moment americans seem to believe that the end of history has come and they are sort

of the custodians, the forever custodians of this world. but that is clearly changing. and i think you would agree that the events in ukraine mil accelerate the speed of that change. i think at the core of that process like a very simple but amanda has a very difficult question and that is why the american view of themselves as the leader or as a head german of the world is compatible with other countries develop mental i, john does what other countries can be, what they aspire to be with? americans being cool day in system being on the question is definitely not for russia, but i wonder what would be the answer rather definite, you know, for russia, but i wonder what it is for a country like india can indeed be what it aspires to be with americans holding on tightly to south appointed lead. i just wanted to be

in diplomacy dialogue and i think the guy must come for dial made leading powers of the word. let's conclude to the news. the world is still an increasing and becoming a lot of people know what of the united states is a powerful be just the world's largest democracy. the nato is a far full miller crew. but at the same, you have a concrete like russia, which is in its own right off to mission, a remarkable culture. and if i may add that because psychology is very important in the understanding of diplomacy, i think russia is still coming to jones with the this member rent

of the soviet union. so other countries need to be careful in dealing with the current crew would just still read it off. that's as powerful as the united states and military jobs. but, and that's it that they should be turning the other way around. because i totally agree with you that especially in geopolitics psychology, is paramount. i mean, it explains pretty much everything bad, you know, the acceptance of multiple a reality. and it's not like it just appearing. they've always been like that in a well, with like, 200 countries. unilateralism is unsustainable to begin with because everybody has their own divergent interest, but that substance by the americans of these multi polar reality. also with me, in the end of that vision of them sounds and the end of that vision of the world, they will have to redefine who they are in this world. do you think psychologically

they can take it? because on some level, it's very similar to what the russians had done had to go through. back in the $99.00 is the total collapse of that own self perception. do you think that americans can hopefully not take on that level of a cognitive dissonance, but at least to redefine themselves in the world, in diplomacy and in the unfolding. at some point, reality makes in america for but it is the so global power of the word russia asserted itself. unfortunately, by reading your credit, but nevertheless, going to read it to the americans that are limits which unilaterally you can push a singular agenda on the bill. we also have j. china is arising

bar. and in the, in the pacific you have a situation where the american, it is not uncheck assuming that if i may assist or india is emergent as one of the concrete words, most populous countries, fastest growing economies, a nuclear power of life and genuine democracy. and a great civilizational header did that goes back to the dawn of time. so these are aspects that matter in terms of cell reception of how followers that gun receive those china looks appointed. so with its own longer st as ultimately came on to the high table on the word rush. i mean there, in the,

in the spiting to be the united states is seen there, but it must get room for other people to join it, you know, to, to give that to room or other people in other countries to join it. it needs to know something about those histories that you mentioned. and i think part of the problem in the world today is that americans are not only arrogant, but extremely ignorant of the world. and it's, you know, cultural heritage is history. the differences within its people, et cetera. now, you mentioned china and i know that in your other interview, you expressed concern that the latest developments and ukraine rhetorically, very vocal, but given that sickly, very timid response of the west. and may involve in china, into a more masculine way of defending what it defines as it's national interests. how concerned you are about that. and how likely is it that in china will undertake

a similar action or comfortable actually being in taiwan or in the, on board of disputes, minutes, neighbors. you see this is concerned about now you can understand why we are both too large issue groups share are disputed border recent history of conflict on the board, several wars as well. and we are concerned about an aggressive job that have been cogent, the not that are free for recently. and the chinese seem to be guided by the notion that they are deserving of what degree of self unilateralism and go to problems and in there has to be naturally careful about now what are some of those china. ready from great,

i think that china had already been drawn that, that the united states is not the singular global part in the word. and back in less than the has mean reinforced by russia action in view. great. so i don't think it will lead to excessive chinese adventure because i'm out, it's mutually assured destruction i'm in the world is balance. but at the same time, china, i think, is one thing to tell the united states that i, we have been telling you so many countries in the world. i've been saying that the united mission system is discredited. now, if you flips 1st, 2nd war world war to be entities, it means sort of the new reality of a new global law in which that is far more acceptance of

a my people are word and you have to negotiate the areas of influence on accommodation with each other, rather than believe that one can get, can the site what the should be. so we are looking for a new architect gerald security to do the work. you spend years working at the united nations representing your country. and i'm sure you know, from the inside, how manipulative, ineffective, that process can be. and that, that countries, especially on the most crucial issues they talk at one another rather than to each other. there's a lot of sharing, there's a lot of preaching very little room for genuine discussion or, you know, given and taking it's more about politics and intrigue behind your back rather than, you know, coming around the table and trying to come up with

a joint solution. and as we're talking about the changing world order, what do you think could be created? what kind of a system could come and represent resent that opportunity for actually enjoying decision making in some sort of an open ended dialogue rather than the united nations being these, you know, these plays where the countries come to, you know, said that position without necessarily being engaged in diplomatic discussions. ready to did the united nation is essentially under by and then from dish and i me and while the russia and the united states can occasionally be rivals this year on when you are being the 511 and the security council and the shannon are interested not allowing that to expand, so we have to change the architecture of the united hello other countries who also

we considerable influence, who are good for the trees of economic power. what aspiration to be brought to support in the genuine sense, in reality, deliberation about the next phase of the kind of word order. we need to move that process. we require the corporation of the united states, but also russia. second thing, if i may quickly, is that the europe in particular today needs a dialogue where it will settle the principles of the new edifice of security which needs to be better after the fragmentation of the soviet. for now, we have only a few minutes left and i was trying to squeeze in 2 questions. one about the

comment, because we talked a lot about security and how it may change in part because of russians, actions. but the global economy is changing rapidly to in this time because of the american response to russian actions. and the implications are far in march. when you look at the global commodity markets and the projections of where they may be, you know, a couple of months from now. how does it make you feel you? my view is that there are 2 meds. emily's one is the mutually assured destruction of new playable. and that is the new truly assured deprivation of sanctions. sanction. those are not a one way street. it's an interdependent global. my view is that the west main, so dependent upon russian gas and groomed and other all my resources will

also feel the binge of the sections. sanctions can white in the short trucks, but they are not the answer. in the long run, especially where crude oil is concerned, oil and gas. there will be an attempt to stabilize prices by boosting production on other oil supplier nations, especially in the middle east in venezuela, in iran, or whenever possible to compensate for sanctions against russia. but i think a much better resolution. economic demands is a ceasefire. a negotiator fees and a return to dialogue on the diplomatic table. one of the major

concerns right now is that the rapid growth of the price is not only because of the training development, but also because of the locker swarms in africa and the drought in north america making the spectra world wide hunger much more isn't well. and not only talking about the western population, they have some reserves, they will not be dying of hunger and, but we are talking about, you know, the population of developing countries in the south, in africa, maybe even in asia given the state of disarray in national community the thing is, it's up for that for that challenge right now? no, i believe not. the world is just recovering from the coven to bend there. countries need a period of economic stability and access to basic switch. but as the

west has gone beyond what the rest are world is not. so therefore india has always taken the stand on this issue. as fairly, as it was possible that the war short and that russia and ukraine should talk and that in europe, in particular, there should be once again the resumption of dialogue, which leads to an enduring peace period of stability and prosperity. so we have been telling this, and we believe in it, because as a developing countries, are stakes, are in a stable global, well, economic or well, and that's there. thank you very much for your perspective. and i may add for your wisdom, and it's been great pleasure talking to you to the pleasures my and thank you for watching hope to hear again next week on well the part ah

with me ah, is your media a reflection of reality? ah, in the world transformed what will make you feel safer? isolation, whole community. are you going the right way or are you being that somewhere? direct? what is true? what is great?

in the world corrupted, you need to descend. ah, so join us in the depths. will remain in the shallows. ah, i look forward to talking to you all. that technology should work for people. i robot must obey the orders given by human beings except where such short or is it conflict with the 1st law? show your identification. we should be very careful about artificial intelligence and the point obviously is too late truck rather than fear. a barrier shop with artificial intelligence wheel summoning with a robot must protect its own existence. with

a crane says 5 people have been injured and a fuel death. both sets on fire in the western ukrainian city of evolve. falling in the parents of motion missile strike, defusing the danger, bush and troops taco scores of minds apparently left behind by ukrainian forces. he follows a miniature engineering unit, i think clears one region along with various with the u. s. president slums vladimir putin as a butcher for his quote, war of choice in ukraine. although in the past he was among those who are coal for the.