a, with a with the welcome to world to part one of the most celebrated generals in history sounds to employ his followers to know the enemy and try to some dude without fighting to send a little work. the art of war is still part of the curricular, in mainly military academy, around the world via the number and the scale of conflicts is only increased. isn't

even possible to retire more as a means of politics or to discuss that i'm now joined by vicky sharman major general of the indian armed forces and director of the united service institution of india. major general is great, great pleasure and great honor for me to join you. thank you very much for time. thank you for inviting you. now in your analysis of the conflict in your career, you often make the point, doug. the west wasn't able to clearly see what was russia's threat. perceptions are you sure it was due to the lack of understanding or on the contrary, a clear realization of what wasn't stake there for russia and ukraine, and a very deliberate, very conscious decision to ignore russia security concerns. yes, of course. there is no denying the fact that of asha has been defining its red lines very clearly. it also articulated its national security concerns. and the

most important drop those was that this former soviet union state should not be incorporated in that too. because that goes walter. d 300 miles away from saint rita's book. so for whatever reason, the vest actually step 2 of those claims. similarly, there was also no follow up on the mince girl. no, you know a cord 20142015 subsequently what happened? the rest was helping ukraine to build up its miller d capability. and there was a kind of a perception in russia that they could be a pre emptive strike. one, been boss dejan and crimea, and therefore, i think it was a hopson choice for russia to take this preemptive war to cause the military entry into your cream. i would love to discuss the logic of that decision and the rationale of that decision with human before we go there. let me ask you

specifically about the expansion of nato, because i read somewhere that kind of leads arrives back in 2008 and the book credit summit, where you cranes intention to join the airlines was formally welcomed for the 1st time that come to lisa rice stated explicitly there and then the cold war was over and russia needed to accept that. that last, do you think this and drive to expand nato wasn't primarily motivated by strategic and security considerations in the west, or wasn't simply about psychology to sort of force rush into submission and recognition of, of it's losing status. wasn't about security or psychology to put it simply. i think curb it was who breeze on american part, they became overconfident after the break of the soviet union. and probably because of historic and animosities they created, wanted to create more dial the most part, russia and that has way boston the break up of for soviet union. george canon was

very, i think every day. and he was prescient. when he said with the new core, what has been, then under the milestone was 22008 when bush wanted villa ukraine to join. and mr. put in really, really hard to articulate his objection and what happened back? well, we are sure entered all of cars cars. yeah. and so to see sure. then there's not 2014, a maiden operating took place and dead after the show was left with no other choice than to go to crimea and been bust region. and since then, things have only been brewing up and that has been coupled with economic sanctions, which is actually being very, very rude and very, really discriminatory towards russia. so it's coupled up these factors and of that deliberate attempt by america and western countries to expand natural,

which is actually a poor structure to take recourse to the section. now, you mentioned russia signaling a disagreement with western strategy and even taking some forceful action. for example, in 2008, but i think that without any doubt, the february decision was the most dramatic of all, not only for the will, but also for the russians. most of us are shocked that russia is now using military force against our neighbor. and we still consider ukrainians to be our brothers. i mean, in literal terms because most of us have families. there are, if you were advising the russian general staff and i'm asking you are not as a political analyst, but as a, as a military man, as a man who has to consider in a strategic room, if occasions do you think russia have any other option at its disposal to on the one hand, address the danger of encroachment of nato, but on the other hand,

without using military force because clearly there are major consequences associated with that, both ethically and humanitarian. li, if i was dead and somebody was really listening to me, then i would have perhaps otherwise some modest chain. there was a very strong 3 prong ability posting, which russia had already adopted. so we should have rated for some more time because with one lack 90000 groups, 190000 groups, it was very difficult for ukrainian or any other force to enter crime. y'all done boss. second issue as a military analysts say fees that are shut initial strategy back to minute strategy to go to t and sort of go to clark you in these areas. this was probably not well talk through and out his way. you know,

the objectives was that you will be able to bring about a political effort to leash and and disarm euclidean armed forces by about 12th march. but that did not come through and then there was a deep river to a east east issue can in again. so that was there were to pull some of those casualties or award to build the logistics of board the compliment entity in the thought line. the coordination command, control communication issues. they did not work out of band all the way it should happen in the classic miller to campaign. but you mentioned the classic merger campaign. and over the last couple of years, all we've been hearing from the western from the east is that in the age of old wars, kinetic wars is over. you know, all the wars will now be hybrid information. war is perhaps some use of special forces. some use of espionage, perhaps for slack operations, but the real army against the army clash is know, is already

a part of history. don't you think that this latest development demonstrated that perhaps we have retired war prematurely because it seems to be a reality not only in europe, but also in increasing reality. now in the pacific when the united states and china seemed to be and the longer had see, i think we had always played this sir. ita live in soft plastic and pins. india has fought hybrid was in bunger dish. you also were preparing for a hybrid was and what happened in you could in was a typical hybrid water right from 2040. so it has only validated that relevance and importance of hybrid bought it. even today, the vest is being a proxy. what in your green? so this water is actually the spectrum up, conflict is much wider. it starts from the lower in, in the non contact, non kinetic domain, then it goes up, the escalation lead across the spectrum,

up country to a full fledged water, which via seeing rid the disk of nuclear escalation, supposed natural would have intervenes. then russia had, you know, put it up of a nuclear forces on operational readiness. so we can not to sort of doertry date, very short kind of observations and make a pretty definite conclusion sort of as heart wrenching as this war is. and it is indeed heart wrenching for most russians. i think it has demonstrated to the world that russia has a credible that turns that it would use military force if it's vital interest. ah, threatened. what about the quality of western to turns? and the credibility of western returns, do you think the world believes that the americans would resort to the use of military force as they, as they claim, see, differences of mind game. so, what we have seen earlier, what happened in georgia,

americans didn't not intervene. similarly, video do simply the, the video from of garnished on and even presence in iraq has turned on. and they're, the leadership is on record to say that we will not physically intervene in ukraine because we run the risk of, you know, escalating into the new. you're also on record to say that we will physically intervene if there is an issue in taiwan. so look, sit, i won't, situation is very different. and again, you know, if you recall, and mister barton made that statement, then the white house had risangua from that statement that what he meant was this, what not this, you know, so this still falling that strategic ambiguity in taiwan contingency. but here they have taken a more strident position, what they will do everything except actually entering physically into ukraine. and for that, escalating the situation to an extent that russia would be forced to up the ante.

now speaking about deterrence, i think it was president theodore roosevelt or us defined it as speaking softly and carry long jake. yeah, but one century after his death it seems that the americans are actually made the reverse that they're, they're not speaking softly. they're speaking of noxious me very rudely. but do you think that stick at this point of time is long enough to force that enemies or adversaries to do what they want to do? that bidding, i may not entirely agree with your analysis because you see there is a great retrenchment which is taking place in united states. they have withdrawn from most of the countries and i've gone east on is a case in quite that was the only to award there in your isha. so they're gone back and all what they're doing, you know, they're trying to sort of full offload. most of the miller

t responsibility to the natural partners and put them in the front lane and out his way. you will see when president dump was dead, he wanted the natural current is to have more share in the, in the budget of natural and us. so those are the things, so i don't think her americans are in the same position to militarily intervene in various contingencies as it was in the basel general. isn't that perhaps even more dangerous? because if they were to take on defy it directly with the russians, we could have negotiated directly and perhaps come to some sort of a solution. but when they are using the obama term sliding from the back, that is pushing the ukrainians on the front lines and pushing other peoples on to the front lines in that sort of a proxy battle. it also limits our ways of coming to some sort of a mutually agreeable solution. doesn't that also jeopardize the prospects of peace?

me absolutely correct. and this is what looked greer's own. and margie domain warfare is all about that it has blurred the lines between the classic military campaigns and peace. and this isn't in action, action security insecurity, delama richest, put, retreat persist, and their port, at least in the foreseeable future. i do not see a way out in ukraine conflict because both sides have taken harden position and with the finland and says, straighten if they're going natural they would, would have further up the anti. so i don't see that, i think we are not a long haul and this conflict is going to continue, and russia will have to be prepared for that. okay, well major general, we have to take a very short break right now. we will be back in just a few moments they chant. hm mm

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

welcome back to work before it became sharma. major general of the indian armed forces and director of the united service institution of indent. major general a few months ago, india and prime minister and their ends are more d, you said that today the world is facing an uncertain situation as nobody's getting what they want them. he made that statement specifically after talking with his american colleague, joe, by then on the phone, had a conversation during which joe biden was trying to push it into joining the rust and sanctions against the russia. that push wasn't very successful. why didn't india side with the americans more promptly? i mean, i would say, why should india signed with the liberty slow? because americans assumed really india is north american team. b. we are an independent country with the largest population. so we would make decisions based on our historical and strategic days with other

countries and based on our own national interest, artist, structure, security, interest, and in that, or country of the steward of russia. who has helped india in strategic programs and has been a, is a libel partner. how can you know, india look the other way around and be extremely opportunistic. so we have taken up positions purely based on our principles and our, our director, or economists of warrant bowlers. now i'm interviewing a lot of non western speakers. there's, there's a lot of them are concerned about being caught in this economic and political crossfire between russia and the west and being penalized for even taking a neutral position. now, india is a large country. it's a very influential country. america wants it to be on its side. that's why they're sitting accommodations towards your country. but my question to you is,

do you think there is any player in this world today? perhaps india, who could take it upon itself to mediate between russian that was given that you have very good ties with both sides and you, you and the rest of the world. how have a clear interest in making sure that the world is operational than this conflict? doesn't turn into yet another global war crypt precisely. that was the reason for india abstaining at number of these, warding at the un because we wanted to maintain a neutral position. and be of the liberals, that interlocutor between russia and your 9 able as an interlocking or you're interested in being that we would do, but it will not happen over treat. firstly, they have a lot of, you know, back door or, you know, behind the curtain kind of diplomacy which will take place, which we are ready to be sort of if for turkey can do retirement to india is

definitely in much but much better position to do it so we will be very happy as long as we are able to facilitate peace and discontinue, we be really happy to play that. now as a horrible, again, as this conflict is there also certain upsides, let's say for our various countries. and i know that over the last couple of months, russia has come up from a number 10 to number 4th as india's oil supplier. and many of the oil supplies that used to go to europe. and i was going to india. i wonder if your country has any qualms about increasing its reliance on russia's energy sources as your european colleagues. so painfully trying to extricate themselves from that. no, if we had any qualms, then despite the western pressures, we wouldn't have been purchasing oil and gas from russia. why you're not care for this malevolent russian energy. who because you see a reorder in a g,

a deficient country. really? well, i thought our economy for the well being of people really quiet chief energy and therefore russia is a reliable partner. so we have been able to utilize this window of opportunity despite the pressure from the risk. and we will continue to do. now as you mentioned before, india is pursuing, it's on foreign policy and negotiating with the americans in doing that and deals with the american. so is russia increasing its corporation with china? and i know that traditionally, india has looked at that with a certain degree of video. once you have a major voice dispute of, in the chinese, you also have security apprehensions about the growth of china. have you seen any change in the russian chinese dynamic over the last half a year and do you think anything substantial has changed their c one has to take of

any realistic view of geo politics you shared common borders with russia? they are your immediate neighbors. we're still at a certain distance and chinese over the deep pockets, and i'm in force 2014. they were able to invest in your energy sector than many other places. so it is russia's right to create that complementarity and interdependence. so russia, india does not dictate to other countries how, what kind of relations it should have with its own neighborhoods. so we have no such qualms are relations with the russia on its own mad it, and it would continue to be. and we are also aware that the show would not undermine india strategic interest, just because they become economic the lee close to china. and that's actually a very interesting question. how sensitive for, according to your sources, is russia to india, security concerns? does russia make accommodations for in disposition?

let's say more than it would be paying attention to other countries. of course it has the kind of weapon system that you have provided to us is very, very exclusive. you're not provided that kind of weapon system to any other country . of course, very recently you upgraded your minority relations with china. and it wasn't when we had to problem with chinese on the line of actual control, russian met all it's contractual obligation and was to the extent of, you know, giving us more and more weapons that we needed. not these are hard times when your desk, the depth of our relationship and russia has gone, or it isn't to the occasion and met in expectations and would continue speaking about the depth of the relationship as well as military corporation. as we are recording this interview, the russians and the chinese are conducting di, traditional neva,

and they've been drills. and one of the things that i heard from russian military analyst is that while china has a very impressive navy, both in terms of human capacity, in terms of their attempts, they lock in the experience and expertise of the actual warfare. and that this is something that the russians may be sharing with that chinese neighbors. that's where the case would that be a concern for in then? you see, if you train a chinese navy, feel it, maybe it is not of any concern. you have a relationship with this engine, navy is very strong and our sphere of influence is into the indian ocean region. and by virtue of our strategic geography, we have a very good domination debt a we are interested in getting out of it to solve china. c, but it's purely from the point of view that 60 percent for the boss is through that . and we want freedom of navigation. but you would see that we are not joined

freedom of navigation, exercise americans at anybody. so i think our navy is really very, very professional and it's video very jan and it can secured in just national interest in the indian ocean region. and we will be start to start with that. you mentioned geography. and i think one of the interesting features of the increasing cooperation between russia and china and also, you know, i think a, a sign of trust in a ways that both russia and china can afford to expand last on guarding their own border, which is no small thing because it's for more than 4000 kilometers long, and essentially russia can now divert it's attention to the west. china can deal with its problems in the pacific and the 2 are essentially standing back to back. i don't know how long it will historically last, and that's why i wanted to ask you, do you think the current level of trust, when you can turn your back to, you know, a country with which we also had the border disputes in the past. do you think it's

primarily necessitated by the difficulties with the west or it can sustain itself historically? this is a big question. and this all depends on how you manage your by later traditions of china. in the past you had problems and sent alicia right in future also, no country would like to see and other guntee with the large military next door. and particularly if that country turns to be the future is send it want to or to the geography. these concerns must think that's a real prospect though, on the part of chinese, because they claim that they have no intention. chinese have done in south china and see the what you call is the 1949 train lane or ward they have done elsewhere. even on the indian borders, well, it does of your certain indications that will, the cartographic consciousness is very high. interesting. it's the same. they let

the shift in the land map and the shifts in the maritime maps. no, no, since you have resolved your border issues with china, that in france doesn't come purely in maturity terms. it is in the economic sphere of influence. you see, look at cent alicia, where you had such a good blow in such a good influence to the chinese economic engagement is more than $50000000000.00. i think yours would be to the tune of $20.00 to $30000000000.00 shaw. the economic influence scanned desert into the political influence and the countries of your neighbors. your neighboring countries will make political choices, which are more in con, grants with chinese strategy can just like an interest. you look at belt and broaden issue of a. it's a chinese who are calling the shots and well, it does integrating economies. so this does are the new forms of influences than not the military influence,

which i bought burton and didn't bridge isn't really and so competitive. and it seems to be suggesting, because i assume that the, the current level of corporation in russia in china would also allow china russia for that matter to take that sensitive issues into account. i'm of the view that if the vest had not enforced islamic sanctions against russia and 2014 probably the trajectory of russia, china relations board, very different. can. i also ask you about the trajectory of the chinese intern relationship because it's hard to imagine the other 2 pair of countries which would benefit more from, you know, they synergies from combining either forces. but, but if you have a border dispute, as we mentioned, then there is a general climate of suspicion. there was kids, this dynamic of mistrust, so entrenched and is it possible to overcome that then time india tried its level

best to have very harmonious relationship with china. from 1993 till 2013, we signed a series of agreement, poppies building peace and tranquility on the border and on the use of force. when india was going through a complicated group situation. as i show a saudi, the chinese, they violated all those elements and did use military force to change the strata school at the line of actual control. now what do, what does india make or topics then that means that, well, they do not want peace and they want probably be on their own domes that they want to china and take issue in which they feel. india is a big bomb. partuto, and it is a good time to put india in its place. but given the size of india and the confidence

that we hold, we will not permit any country under the sun to stretch equally courses and actors weight, you know, we've taken, or screw miller to responses which i know has understood. and hopefully, with these lessons, it will have a sobering effect on chinese. are to negotiate with us from a position of batteries. what i'm hearing from you is that the chinese needs here revision some of their wisdoms of son. so who actually are good for mutual accommodation rather than 0, some outcomes. anyway, major general, we have to live with there. thank you very much for your time. thank you so much. thank you, and thank you for watching you hope to syria again was the part ah with

mm hm. mm. who needs to come to the russian state to never as time goes on and ignore some scheme, diva cables, all sons, and oh, me could pin 55 when. okay, so 9 is $25.00 will be the one else calls with we will ban in the european union. the kremlin. yup. machines. the state on to russia for date and c, r t spoke neck, given our video agency, roughly all band to on youtube with

. mm hm. ah, ah, ah, crane. well, never be a victory for russia. ukraine war is a proxy war. this is a war between russia and the united states. as a mom on made, it comes to lawsuit kit than in cowboys. america forces are and you're not in europe, engage in conflict with russian forces. the american forces are harris, defend nato allies. nato escalates even more indiscretion, laundry, opperation.