a with offices come with me. hello to welcome to was apart. the idea of creating a clone of leader around the pacific ocean has been tantalizing the minds of western strategist ever since washington announced its intention to give it to asia . but it never quite came to fruition, in part because of india hesitancy,

isn't going to be more likely now after the conflict in ukraine. well, to discuss it are now joined by pressing stephanie, a former engine army officer and the editor of the force news magazine. it's great to talk to you, sir. thank you very much for your time. thank you. now you cream is half a world away, but i was personally surprised by how much attention is paid to this subject in the indian media. and frankly, by bill level, the depth of analysis because this is quite something different than what we see in the western media. i mean, not supporting russia, but understanding the context and all the antecedent, strategic and secure gym to students. how come the indian seems to be more knowledgeable on this topic than many of the europeans who are much closer to the actual place of conflict? you see, there are 2 fundamental things here. the 1st is that the russia is both

a european bar as well as ation bar number 2. ah, the russians and the chinese, the shareable view. and which is precisely the reason that they have this very tight to strategic partnership, which was described by the chinese leader as rock solid. and the 3rd thing is that today there are 2 security architectures which are coming up in the asia pacific region. as we are all aware that this is the area which will decide the big fall geopolitics in this century. so one security architecture is the asia pacific security architecture, which has been conceived by china, fully backed by russia. and this is pivoted on the built and road initiative, which russia supports. the 2nd architecture is the endo pacific architecture, which is america lift. it is led by the americans. not there's

a big difference between the 2. and the big difference is that the 1000000000 load initiative it is structured at all, defy me use once in days. it is about shared prosperity and cooperative security. i mean, it's a subject doctor's big enough to discuss energy. we can actually narrow it down, so you have one symbol to assist the other thing, whether there is one beneficiary of old, the world, or whether they can be meaning grace at deriving the benefit from living together on this planet. right. so now coming to the american teen america does not have any answer to debate to lord initiative. a medical always think saddam's of deterrence and the corner school of redundancies defense not today the american military bar fees that they are not really up to the levels. and therefore under the by did administration a new concept periods award. instead of calling it deductions,

now they call it integrated it others, which basically means that the allies and the partners barclays, india. they will also have a ruled. having said this, what america has been able to do with the da's office of present gum in the movie government. we are not in a lie. we are not nimbly p alliance with the americans. yet, the government has st. ford foundation military agreements with the americans, which basically means that we can do advance military exercises with them as well as with other parties. exactly, exactly. so this whole idea of ford. when you talk of it, you shouldn't need to as far as long as he's concerned, who's a state also of china, the foreign minister. he has called this an issue natal. it has 3 competence. competent one is the court for the other 4 nations, your america, japan, ryan,

australia and india. lucy, all the 3 are military alliances there with the allies with america. india is the outsider, but yet india has gone and signing the foundation agreements with. so it is part of their comeback maneuvers, but it still keeps sense options. fairly open. do i understand you correctly, that essentially the difference between these 2 are security architecture models is whether ah, you only one country with the help of its allies, gatzo, you know, insecurity needs. matt, according to its own, varies, shrieked our desires, or whether it is not only about security as in the 2nd model, but also about economic economy and prosperity and actually creating a secure environment that also allows you to leave and let leave. this is precisely where the beta node and he should of does use heat. now coming to so there are 3

elements. and this asia little did the chinese stock off. and they said, this is the biggest rectal them. one is the court. second is the arcus, the somebody which was signed up between australia, yuki, and use that is the august somebody. and the 3rd is the 5 eyes intelligence. so this is what wong equals the ation nato. basically, the whole concept theories, in addition to integrated deterrence, which is the partnership of the military, you worse military when the allies under partners like india. they basically wanted a rule for natal. can i ask you, because once you i, when you figure out how you're going to protect something, you need to figure out what is that you are protecting. yeah. in these vision of security in the, as you called in the pacific security with essentially the de americans in the lead,

everybody else and shipping in. but the americans making their own decisions according to their own vision of the world. what is it that, that, that security model is protecting d r a? basically this ab want to protect the ceilings of communication from vista and pacific to indian ocean region. but what they are trying to do is sort of put pressure on the p l in navy, which has the many times to gord. going along the ceilings of traditional communications. lucy, they want to basically put pressure on their trade. they want to put pressure on the chill points. the 3 big joe points, one is street of malika street of homo's, which is on the other extreme. and then you have bulk of been deep. so these are the teacher points as far as the, it's a way of protecting, ultimately the american dominance, right? precisely eminence of the land constraining the chinese many times a good old,

which is a complement of the beta load initiative. that is precisely what they're doing in america, is a buckland. ok, i can understand why americans with one that did, even though i think that rationale could also be a question, but what are the partners deriving from that? in addition to just simply giving americans the money to fulfill their own goals. so you see the whole idea is that america is still the super bowl, which it is not my concept of thinking is that today it has a competitor in china. but the whole thing is that american dominance should remain in the asia pacific region. so therefore, these parking lot shipping in because they have a alliance, why india is doing is for a different reason altogether. india's reason is, india believes that it can balance military part of china by being close to the americans. i hope we can come back to this issue after we discussed something that

i began with, which is the conflict in ukraine. i heard you say that there is a difference between a warrant and the military operation. and i think that is a very surprising idea to many of the europeans who somehow managed to believe that there is no military power in the use of military power in the world, even though that's been going on for the last 30 years. so what is the difference between a military operation and a war? so it's a huge difference when we talk of war, what is coming into plays all the domains of war to be activated to did that or something like 5 or 6 domains or 4. then you, then you proud it is what you want to do, you build that whole plan. for example, if russia was to go to war to model with any country, i would assume they will. first of all are trying to track the electromagnetic spectrum. they will try and finish the communications. water is basically

a planning with all the capabilities that you have. the onset is all the capabilities you have. what i understand that a ship are going in ukraine is the out of warning back to lot of capabilities for natal. just in case nickel comes in. and what they're trying to do is limited. this is precisely what president would then say that we are doing special military operations. so it is not a classic war. well, and according to present, which and the goal of this military operation is to take control or suppress ukraine's military capabilities and limit the influence of certain and far right groups that have an influence on both on the governmental processes that are being used as proxy forces by ukranian government, as well as by outside forces. but apart from that, russia is not interested in taking ukrainian sovereign to, for example,

or ruling ukraine, re incorporating ukraine into like some for more of a new soviet union. but despite these limited focus, i heard you say that this military operation managed to undermine or damage native credibility. so there is a wider dimension. what does it mean practically? and do you think native even care is about credibility? what is the, what is needed? credibility in practical terms. let's start with what is nato's credibility and then we'll go how it is damaged. credibility is ideally, natal should have finished with the war, subject it no overt, no, it says that we are defensive organization. they are not, well, 5, their ways of next day extension solving of explosion. the of hubbard you see starting from the clinton administration. they've done that. so when you are increasing your area, often through and then certainly you will order defensive organization. no. so

basically what the americans were trying is to nato 2 things. one is to keep strengthening the draws. it locked the partnership. that is important for them that the cool water is over. but we should have a fun horn. well, what the concert log, dig partnership. and the 2nd was that if need to could have a rule in the asia pacific. there were also looking there. doug, no, what has happened during these ukrainian special military operations is i believe their credibility has gone down tremendously. why it has gone down is because the us, they were supposed to deter russia. and they got detoured by russia. when president fulton said that if any fly zones is created, that you see doc means it will not be tolerated. or if any, a cock with arms and ammunition takes off from any place, am, comes into the ukrainian territory. i will take it that,

that country's part of the war should be to has done nothing for these smaller countries in the isha. this which, which honestly do not want militarization. they do not want. you can ask the aussie on people as he and states, nobody wants militarization. what the americans were hell bent. in fact, in june of 2021 needle in the conference was suggesting that they should have a larger role in the asia pacific. so i think not a lot of pressure pushback from the asi on states that the do not want these people here. so the credibility is gone down. oh, okay, mr. hatch hani, we have to take a short break right now. we will be back in just a few moments. station b

ah ah, ah, ah, [000:00:00;00] ah, ah. a misty, absolutely. well,

with some of the free people would end up with shock because usually i'm not sure somebody who can watch some stuff done with all the little money somebody out there with with a community then it was up here at the office

with a photo with ah, hey, welcome back to was a part with a former engine army officer and the editor of force news magazine. mr. haney. before the break,

we were talking about the fact that the doctrine of nato and the american security doctrine is largely based on deterrence. and which is essentially an idea that any country will be able to take any insight from the americans, because the fear of the american response would be larger. and as he sat with russia and ukraine, it didn't work. and you also mentioned that other countries are watching, but do you think they're just watching or do you think the that practical stop the way they conducted their foreign policy or security policy may change as a result of what they're observing in this wider clash between russia and native because there are some, some fights on the ground, but there is also much bigger unseen clash between these giants happening. so you see my assessment is that the credibility of chinese has gone up in the region. why is he that is because the french president,

the jumbling jossla even for, has been by then they all have been on public england. she's big, what she is doing precisely what he believes. and he believes that the security of a nation is absolutely important. so he's sticking with the russians. no, so what will happen here in asia pacific is because the credibility has gone up and see for the chinese ward is always the last option. chinese believin cognitive defeat of the, in me, a cognitive confrontation of the enemy. so basically what they are pushing forward is prosperity. and at the same time, if something happens, they basically believe in what we call the grizzled operations. we keep working in those operations at the same time, build up deductions which keeps the americans at b, which is precisely what they've done in thigh. what,

what they've done in south china sea. so everybody's playing their own to turns game. i know for a fact that the art of war, that famous work of religion military genius was studied by the k g b officers in soviet time. so i'm pretty sure that the russian leadership is influenced by this idea. but at the same time, i'm, as we mentioned before, there have been several waves of nato expansion. and while russia expressed its displeasure, it never really put it its feet down. why do you think the russians have waited for so long and wasn't in precisely because. * of this patients when they called strategic patients that they had to take the military measures right now, which is, i think we would agree the worst possible option. so you see a, 1st of all, this is nothing sudden of older. there's nothing southern about it. why is he that is,

please recall in the 2008 little which artist summit that is the dying when the americans decided to put their anti ballistic messiah messiah system in poland . i'm. this is the time when officially ukraine applied for nato membership. and this is the time for the 1st time president with it who had kept quiet right from 1000 to became president. i think 2008 keaton doug. mention, i mean he was not offensive at all. he's not looking for greater russia at all. he said that this is unacceptable. georgia and you could end is completely unacceptable. anything coming here? now, if you keep trying to bring the orange of lucian, there, you see, since 2021 ukraine has been doing exercises. the other embittered in the command and control of the needle structure. i mean, this was going on and everybody knew alady as he said, has been going on since 2008 since fortune here is. don't you think that there

would be some benefit to russia expressing its displeasure more forcefully so that we don't have to go there with our troops now and deliver a lot of pain and a lot of damage on the ukrainian people. we also have to, you know, leave with that other who flew vin for he a point. but you see the security of a nation. and please, let's the stand, one thing with them because don't understand, the russia is not any other country. the russia has a rich tradition of very rich history. it has a culture. it is a large moss, with 11 time zones. it has thousands of nuclear weapons. you don't fool around with russia. now the point is, god, as he said, fall leaves of greater expansion already. hubbard. they were trying to lose some orange dilution here, which is what you also mentioned. and in fact, one of the what is, must have been of the rushes that these people from the don bus area ready. so

they'll actually come inside russia and start building problems that now 2 months ago, ukraine's military neutrality, which is one of moscow, steve goals. and the operation was an absolute non stop for the ukrainian leadership. and now they're open to discussing and they even put it on paper in terms of the proposals that could be looked into. is that the decision that could be made by ukraine and within the ukraine or g thing, they will still have to run it by washington. i think you see this decision 1st to for what has been made by prisoners zalinski publicly saying that he does not want to be a member of nato, is a, does he and that he has made look, he also has to live in ukraine. he may have become a bit of a little, but you see the amount of refugees, people who have gone to the amount of destruction that has happened to i think that is all his thinking. and he has repeatedly said or television to really is a countries the little countries that look, i was expecting your help. you guys just took me up the garden, bought at

a bundle. we like a hot potato gutters. precisely what the emerald. and he's still appealing to them for help, rather than, you know, making a strategic decision of negotiating directly with the new choice today. you see, it's a gosh 22 situation. what are, what are the do? because less, less be very clear. in my assessment, president put in is very clear that there are certain red lines which will not be crossed, even if this means a wrecking ukraine. he doesn't want it asked her, choose as a present between russia and ukraine at the end. exactly. a w as in money emissions, but that is precisely where he's going, which is why you see no, laura bombing is going on. that is the reason for that. so the blame for that should not be put on put in it should be put on by the negation at about gleaning with i want to ask as a, as a person of a strategic mind, i'm not trying to flatter you. but the, you know, as somebody who's familiar with strategy as, as a discipline,

how can russia help ukraine walk away from that red line that has been crossed by various powers? how can russia give ukraine, ah, what it needs and protect its own interests? really simple, easy, it's already said, doug. the red line is neutral, ready? licked zalinski except that yes, neutrality, i mean docs are going on. legged be said crimea, there's no way that the russians will give it is absolutely critical for them. as far as the 2 independent republican don barza concern, i think they can be consultation. what can be done because of the language problem that are a lot of issues that they can be discussed and certainly no, not little membership. i mean, this is what it is, the thing it's within is a landscape power or the power of fly ukraine as a state to decide on that issue. can they make that decision? yes, they can me because he's already been humiliated by the natal and the americans. do

you think that's acceptable to the americans after they have come face to face with the russian determined as lucy, americans have no choice for america? ukraine is not a court interest. they will not fight for ukraine, but the russians will fight for ukraine. it's a deck or interest americans know that americans are just trying to humiliate russia and that's about it. and all they are bouncing on india. also, they're telling the india that you'll stop or, you know, there's a little bit of trade, no stop buying oil. what's going on? and what do you think there will be the indian act on that? do you think there will be intimidated by the owner? those usually because this is our national interest. there are so many things figured from russia. let me list for, for you. what we get from russia is, 1st of all, the, the military equipment, the technology was nobody else will give us that i should give us. then number 3,

the out of bridge to china. you see this out. i see the russia, india china, this former mine my estimation, it was strengthened for the bigger dis, from day, from russia, and with russia, v, hovel, comfort. and in any case, that is a great possibility today of a repeatable trade and reward that there is also a great possibility, a huge nation, the russian market because of all the western companies living. and there are lots of promises there. so i see, i see honestly 2 things to happen. first of all, india certainly is under a lot of pressure. why it is under pressure in my estimation is because when you are a huge learn mos lake subcontinent, like india, you're on a small country. you cannot stand on 2 stools, you have to decide whether you have to have self sufficient foreign policy as well . so therefore, therefore, i think your to be a disaster. if off the having learned and observed you crave in the,

i still tries to go when side chord and price to be very close to the american under the against americans at all. mean, either it is like they need to leave and let live with the problem is what the americans don't understand. the dead idea of liberal values. democracy, human rights. it's not acceptable to so many countries. there are civilizational countries like china, like russia. yeah. many of flowers in the world that should be allowed to blue currently, exactly. this is something the americans don't undecided. i only have time for one more question. and i want to come back to what we already discussed before. this change in the and in the global perception of security, national interests and what countries may take in order to do that. ah, it's clear that china and india have to share the content just like russia and ukraine have to share the geography. do you think they will be perhaps their reconsideration,

both in beijing and in new delhi about how they can do that. given that i think the, the quality of the american promises and what america would do supposedly, for its allies, has been put on quite vividly on display in the recent events in the ukraine will use he, in my estimation, after the ukranian graces on what is going on there and what we have seen of the americans there, that the americans will not come to fight. you'll war show it should be really clear doing dns that their foreign policy should be based on geography. the geography is critical for a foreign policy and dad for it is important that we have cooperation with china. this is precisely why wong, he wasn't endowed. he simply, he came there to see that. all right, we have a problem on the border issue, but let us also look at the overall a relationship, which of course, the moody gum does not accepted so far. but i just took a mr. soggy level. what is also dead in the leader now?

perhaps some more, you know, wisdom is sort of shared and they come to the decision that he is india basically hostile, live, read it is and read it is, is where i show is and where china is. and when focus thought is absolute then in some way it also. 2 i think d, prioritize of security is the only concerned because at the up until this point, we only thought about security as a paramount issue. but the more inclusive framework allows there to be for economy, for, you know, culture staging, mutual respect in some way, indiana should also reconsider to, to see in off nor joining beta. road initiative should reconsider how we can cooperate with china. this is the way i see it because this board asia was not gonna go very naughty. it got to escalate. and that is not something that anybody wants. okay, well,

we have to leave it there. it's been great pleasure for me to talk to you. thank you very much. thank you so much. thank you. thank you for watching cold to see you again next week on wells apart. ah ah. so what we've got to do is identify the threats that we have. it's crazy confrontation, let it be an arms race is on, often very dramatic or development only personally and getting to resist. i don't see how that strategy will be successful,