to break is exploited if arrangement well to discuss it, i'm now joined by some gyro distinguished tallow at the united service institution of india. mr. barrow, it's a great pleasure, great honor for me to talk to you. thank you very much for your time. my pleasure to be on the show. now. thank you. i once heard from a prominent european politician that it doesn't matter whether elephant fighting or making law, the grass underneath them, get trampled. and if we extend that metaphor to the geopolitical situation in the world today, it's not just the grad underneath them that gets affected, it's valleys into villages a far as miles away. do you think russian to west a fully aware of the, of the kind of damage that confrontation is visiting up upon 3rd party? well, i'm pretty sure they understand the question is what they're doing about. the fact

is that the don't looking, learned as being of dealing with a very difficult global environment for a long time. i would say for 300 years, i think we have been a colony of the british for a long time and then be had a little system dominated by the rest after the 2nd world war is traditionally dominated also by the rest. but even in multilateral organization, so dominated by major us. so what is now called the global salt, which is essentially a don't a big countries are used to be called card world. and as you're going to them, but has not been in a good position for a long time. and it's only in the last couple of decades with globalization and new opportunities for growth that, you know, countries like china and india and many other countries in latin america and africa experienced. i think the current crisis, international crisis,

both the water ukraine, but more importantly, all the policy kind of decisions taken as a consequence of the war on hunting us. india hasn't very interesting sense here because both the east and the west, both russia and the united states. i trying to of course, it to that side. but it does. this is it's out as a leader for having the leader of the global south. one gas mean for india is foreign policy stands in practical terms, was possible in practical terms in doing all this had an independent but see i've been trying to time it became a republican one to 5 to 7. it does have different names used to call it non alignment. then we talk about strategic autonomy. but essentially, the current policy towards the rest of the work is to have an independent or policy of decisions based on, on interest and,

and understanding that we are the foolish nation. that india, like china, like russia, like a europe of mainland europe, and many others who knew they're still introduce in latin america, the box, russia. we had a civilizational entity and we have seen ourselves as a country that has a message based on the long history, authorization, 5000 the history of us, in addition. and the 4th of it deeply for a identity that we hope to have an independent voice. and whether it was never in the us or be able to watch by on to the, to my well, everyone has had an independent wasn't international affairs. well, but i think there is definitely a independence in the rhetoric of many engine leaders. but you, by the way, yourself wrote that despite all washington's efforts to have in your daily

conscripted to so called the rules based democratic order, it has a vital interest in upholding a different set of rules. those that would support broader economic development and prosperity. but how ground is in these multilateral view. i mean, how free it is from the can taishan all fine, you know, getting some credentials of a democratic state from washington. you mentioned the very long history of your civilization. but when i watch indian media, i also see that it's very important for many people to sort of feel themselves to be in the good graces of the west, because supposedly the west issues, those, you know, good democracy certificates. well, i don't think we're all going to want certificates. i don't think that's, you know, and she's been political, you know, she present your talk about indian media. india media is very diverse. issue for us

has always been the fact that because of our colonial history and english is the most important language in this country. so kind of integrating language because in the, as a country off a summer languages and english remains are linked to the word. so there isn't much greater influence of the english speaking word on the maybe think what we read, etc. plus the people to people contact. i mean, if you look at the numbers of indians living around the world, most of them are on the speaker, united states, united kingdom and center. and so they're all in the media. you will see that biased, but i think we must distinguish between the rhetoric of the media hoping in the media and the use of the gun. but i think government and india successively including the present have taken an independent position. we have tried to little issues with this with russia on, with china,

on united states or indeed with other countries like japan, germany, france on the basis on national. and it's not as if you're not going to pressure from time to time. come on, the fisher, and i can talk about innovative incentives that come under pressure. but each time you come under pressure, i think it is our good fortune that we have had a national leadership that does a centered independence when you're just seen recently on the water in the u. n. a security council. india has taken a real office on it does not bandwagons with anybody else. now, you mentioned a moment ago and you wrote about that before the bose, the humanitarian consequences of russia's military operation in ukraine and western economic sanctions. were intended to punish russia for that are hurting the global community to substantial expands. do they do that though in equal measure? do you think they could be compared in terms of impact?

well, i was a significant question. i've got a new sequence measure, but the fact is that the inflation global inflation triggered by the rising price goodbye, that isn't full price. and then with the, the disconnect in the financial system of the various we cannot make sanctions imposed by united states and the nature of ours. all of them together are certainly back to us. and we are, we in india read that no looking would have been on the receiving end of the combined effect of all of and you know, you can get into a blend game who's to play with them on the west just to man. but i think the fact is that you, in these channels conflict, i would argue both sides. and i think i'm leaning in gleaming is irrelevant than geo politics because they kind of do anything with that. but the

reason why, why i'm asking this question is because i think we will like nobody would think twice before condemning when we all understand that this is the worst possible outcome. the question is whether there was any alternative to that. but i think there is a perception in the international community that sanctions are somehow and more moral and more ecological means of doing politics. even though if you look at the number of people who are affected by the decisions, i think they're much larger than the number of people contacted by the direct conflict. so i think it's a, it's also very important point to sort of look at the motivations contain to war for, for the concrete interest, various versus essentially a how the culture style action that affects everybody. and very, very little consideration for, you know, 3rd parties will have nothing to do with struggle with, you know, you're right. and that's what i was doing. some of my columns was republish to to

go back to march april this year, beginning of the facilities that sanctions supposed to wall out of blood instrument . they do not distinguish the targets. you'll see the impact of what example us sanctions on the on and how, you know, everybody has been impacted by that really india and the receiving end office transactions for a long time. so sanctions auto blunt instrument and i think it is to say that a conflict between 2 countries could have been contained within those 2 countries. which has happened in many other cases. but the minute ground global sanctions. and that to sanctions huge in summers, each thing to national system. i mean, you take, for example, the sanctioning of the russian center back. i was reading somewhere that, you know, right to the 2nd one was the bank of international study runs in switzerland. never sanction the dice friend the german central bank for a company. the german banks would not sanction. so you know,

better than discrimination. and i think fracturing central bank certainly is something which has hurt us. and most importantly, you know, the pressure on the market to try and just, i'm saying don't buy russian on by, you know, the lawyer sent all of this her don't up in countries and, you know, many of us in india i've been right now. listen to this is a fascinating question for me. how that was applies it's pressure because of the one hand. it has many indirect ways of sabotaging its own direct commitments. but on the other hand, if we look at the news about old pack making, a decision to lower is oil production despite very heavy and very african american low being. it's clear that americans scope of influence, even with its own allies, is somewhat limited. how do you assess western capacity of getting out what

washington once at this point of time, do you think the pressure have changed in any way? well possible, but that's up to in the sense that there's much greater willingness now to use a financial sector as an instrument. i've been asked to kind of do it and i'm with you. it makes you see that the instrument on sanctions. i wonder what time i sent in the past. central banks were never sent, but now that is happening. so the financial sector coming to the no spotlight as part of sanction. but more importantly, i think the change that has happened in the last 20 years compared to before that particular report on india is the global i regional body. and in some ways, you see that in the china dependence of chinese companies on the market, for example, the dependence of our company. so the change in the global system,

you can all mix is government trading. that was, it has the full change, the way in which sanctions are being used to kind of sanction techniques of being device. but i want to still make a distinction between the destination of the states of government. i mean, you talk about opec is an organization of government. so and when it comes to doug with you stand by national interest. when it comes to private companies, you know, a corporate boards and understandable to some extent. mr. bar, we have to take a very short break right now, but it will be back in just a few moments station, a a,

[000:00:00;00] a ah 3 with sensitive water is thrown in. the old hon and the snow falls about oscar. when this comes with an idealist, we sprung from dosher hours from them to lower the do it in bt dufrane. you could kicked away in the pals teacher skills on the edge. on the brown asia goal was to eliminate the up against him because

a little bolcom the and the crucial chest middle school was leading swiftly. mon is not as good p t d still not of what you could eat with the leukemia. well, they need to will live up sheet. any video picks that will be to go with this but no gross issue. the missed the need in the middle south and you can because he's not the duties of those type of miss dempsy. this material. but this phone book even though so clay unit should update those little bit just to look me. it doesn't help out with them. you have yet to me, she, those patrons, ah, yes, please. and you'll have to learn this maritza to handle most of his emotional specially to renew the lease is up to engine. you talk a little of doing piecemeal. mm.

ah. welcome back to one of the parts with son jaya barrow, distinguished fellow at the united service institution of india. mr. barrow before the break, we're talking about are somewhat a diversion stand. dad, national governments may on politics and doing business internationally and private companies. and yet, at the same time, i think perhaps you would agree with the, the globalization as we knew with only, you know, 5 or even timing years ago. it's not there anymore. and the united states a while trying to punish some of it. and it is undermining these various systems. so let's say, i think are rising, the 5 or 10 years going forward,

which policy is state oriented policies or state oriented intention or private oriented intention to reach will prevail? well, i think suddenly, you know, looking at a 5 year term or something in india, i'm in one of the state. we already have seen a shift in the last 5 years. we government and then the government has non what is going on when a beyond which is self reliant in the program which is essentially went to reduce our dependence, particularly for could you going to acknowledge the difference or not to do something about it, you know, and other entrepreneur, you've done it and then you get to reduce our dependence on other countries and to become much more so i, i joke with my friends and the ruling party which is about to give them the money is now like, got a lot of this on the policy of medical in the fifty's of building

a sensor that based on the rest of the and and now once again we had a next phase where because of the challenge of normalization because of the global change to a down because dominant to gaining system is no longer looking, we're going to check some sanctions. i think for all these reasons and also from an indian one to do the pressure from china on us. we are trying to reduce our dependence, extend them dependence, and become more. and i think that's going to next week. now you speak about some reliance, bigger involvement of state and the economy as synonymous things, things that are related to each other. and i think there's a very strong narrative in the was that whenever a face role, especially in bigger countries, that can challenge the united states whenever i say for all is increased. and

that's, that's a way to, to talk christy or to tell him parent is, but i think we are coming to the very interesting point in history where self sufficiency or someone t i becoming a means of achieving democracy. am i wrong here in because it sounds like a paradox, but if more countries are pursuing their own self interest, the democratic system internationally seems to be improving walker. see, i don't know, understand walkers, you know, want to do is to bring the focus back to solomon. i think what you saw doing the globalization was reduced emphasis on sunday. and the idea that the one to slap, i think from a screen on the slide that you're on, the quote was trading on equal terms. i took a better long with the kids and therefore missions auto center. yes. on that is

that that's part of the don't know kind of systems like on the one that always a different direction. and therefore that you come to, i don't think, you know, the united states are going to decide what is a democracy and what is not. but it isn't that, well, i mean, i understand what it did. democracy, working on a domestic level, essentially means that every member of the society or every group has a certain input. and it's treated fairly in proportion to its size within the society that everybody's interests are accounted for. and when we translate out to the international system, it seems to be working. it could be working in the same fashion. so countries big and small, it doesn't mean that they have the same amount of influence, but it's leaves our interests would be taking into account the global processes could be structures in

a way not to penalize or ostracize one or the other. in this answer, do you think global democracy as a way of taking into account various interests and trying to integrate them into the decision making? isn't it possible? aren't we already moving toward in that direction? i'm afraid not. now doable. system is about system. we talk about, you know, you want to give states of the united nations was constructed on the principle of equality. but even in constructively admissions, we need to un security council of which we have still not a member. and the more powerful and the less possible. and even within the next organizations, like the july bank, the big economies are bigger lights. so in the international system, we have never be any factors, demarcus. it's cloud based system and will always have.

so i don't think that is going to change much. in fact, if anything, what we are now see is a real personal rather than social democratic way of dealing with issues. now, one of the most interesting discussion, the post i circles today is about neo colonial is indeed an effort to reassert your power as a way of preserving your someone say, unfair privileges. i think the russians are really trying to frame that struggle with the west and those tribes, they presented as both the own client for political and economic sovereignty, but also as an effort to create a more fairly more affair and international system. what do you think about that? do you think western had you want to conditions a colonial and they're very core? well, it's not just the less i said when i sit in india and look at

a china seeking to be an issue. and that is why i said that, you know, we're in the one with a currency, and we're in this on equal was now looking countries, and she's a global solve our speaking space for them. so i think that is the way i would look at, i'm the world today that the west has always been dominant for the last 200 years. but other countries have made this all of major on the soviet union, which is no longer there. but russia, in its own area, is a dominant china initial 6 to be a dominant some a q of being a dominant voters. i'll be sure that we have like big brother to our smaller neighbors. it's in the nature of the international emissions that the currency is paula, and therefore the, the, the weak. sure all this, again,

is the strong. and when you look at the long run systems which continue, i'm done so benign market. a lot of these in terms of professional intellectual property, right, which you maintain service, you know, global in the quality that is or developing one was fighting against. let me talk about a new international economic already, the 19th, eighty's and ninety's and, and many of us in the big one wondered, changes in the global system. we wanted of much want to quit to one system. but in order to that struggle continues. but if you look at the level of this down says that it's pretty clear that they are hurting the powerful chase constant. more even than smaller countries. because the united states is no longer capable of maintaining its alliances. and, you know, investing in them to an extent that it used to do that before. i wonder if a more fair distribution is that not only is that of an ideological or moral,

but the necessity of what in time. because, you know, having your neighbor or your who even, and me get something that is once ultimately serves you as well because it creates a more predictable situation. don't you think that the time itself is calling for a more and more fair distribution of both resources and power? well, i think that is why many of us, if you simply, i do believe that the global system is evolving towards what we call a my diplomatic system. i think, you know, the saw unit on what you saw, my point on what the direction in which we're moving and that is sent to you on the didn't go to the leadership and i believe was probably the real to do that. you're moving the direction home on monday to call no one to reach a larger number of countries play a bigger. i mean it may not be

a perfect democracy. you know, a small country, let's say like more abuse and see or the same was as india, it's contribution to the global common good is smaller, i mean are, is proportional to what you bring to the table. yeah. so the direction in which you're moving, in my judgement, these are multiple us and the current crisis, we accentuate that process. and i think the, the west, particularly united states, i think europe has come to what example even the french have talked about the multiple of system. if you see the speech of french a long day that they then they don't follow through on that on that talk with is good to begin with the thought a talk about being a monday. so i can found the are going to come to

a started to go home. you initially you see frontier with the whole we are moving towards the most people in our system. know whether we foster slow, depends on the rent or like what we're seeing right now. right now, let me ask you one last question and this is something that political analyst i rarely ask, that i think is absolutely essential to understanding the design, the spirit of the times. i think both russia and the west until logically, i'm born and most basic worldview where there's only one, you know, gone, and one devil, which i think, give that rivalry such an intensity and such a high school for demonizing, why each other? india, on the other hand, is this the culture which i assume comes with a different understanding of diversity. the, the sort of the structure of diversity, the practical value of diversity,

as well as the practical value of power distribution. because within your pantheon of god, you know they're stronger, god, they're no less powerful gods, but they are all important than they all make the big can say on. i wonder if the pulling, the stick ontology could be more conductive to the, to multi point one that we've been talking about, especially in the new that is that to assume the leadership, the presidency of both d 20 and the some high corporation organization is here. a very fascinating question. i think it's also very important question because that was the me in the me look at our sense in the last 75 years that we have been that we are multicultural motor and just multilingual. in many ways anybody a mission. and therefore we bring plurality blog, not just about ourselves, what i want to well. unfortunately in india we now have already done debate between

this pluralist tradition and a growing a session or not. majority is a. and i think that some domestic on that is what was happening within the country when all of us who believe in the lives of that because they slogan used to be unity in diversity. none of the foundation of india and the list below diversity. but construct our unity based on our diversity. i think that's the message of the indian republican i hope that personality of india as a nation remain. so that the rest of the world, we have a message. i mean, i used to be just productive on one thing. on your friends and you repeatedly make this part that india plural mission is a nation of diversity and therefore brings to the world. and you will be looking at things. and that is our son, and i hope we preserve that character. our mission, that's only your strength, but i think that's something that the world is very desperately needing right now. mr. baron, been

a fascinating conversation. thank you very much for your time. thank you. thank you for having me and thank you for watching you hope to hear you again. well, the part, ah a oh. 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 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 with sandra water. use that argument. september 2022. and now go down. the ukrainian military shells, the city, cecily targeting those up a raunchy, a nuclear power plant,