a power struggle accentuated by the war in your brain and the rising tensions over taiwan has temporarily leaves. another axis of swelling is balances and potential troubles. this time between the global north and the global south. given how dearly developing countries have been paying for the decisions made in the sub will develop world, isn't the time arrived to break this exploited if arrangement, both to discuss it, i'm now joined by some giant borrow, distinguished palo, and the united service institution of india. mr. barrow is 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 our funds are fighting or making law, the grass underneath them yet trembled. and if we extend that metaphor to the geopolitical situation in the world today,

it's not just the grad underneath them. that gets impacted, it's the valleys and the villages was a part of miles away. do you think russia a fully aware of the, of the kind of damage that confrontation is visiting up upon 3rd party? well, i'm pretty sure they'll understand. the question is, what they're doing about the fact is that the don't looking one has been 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 we 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 ups. so what is now called the global song,

which is essentially a don't a big countries on it used to be called card world and voted if 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, 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. and it 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, 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 well, this hadn't independent fun. but see, i've been trying to time it became a republic in 1004 to 7, a different names used to call it non alignment. then we talk about strategic autonomy. but essentially, the quarter in policy towards the rest of the work is to have an independent 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 are still introducing latin america the conservation. we had a civilizational entity and we have seen ourselves as a country that has a message based on the long history of us. are musicians, 5000, you know, history of us, in addition. and the for somebody deeply for a identity that we have to have an independent voice and whether it was in the us

or be able to watch bi monthly. we 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 the so called rules based product order, it has a vital interest in upholding a different set of rules. those that would support broader economic development and prosperity. but how grounded in these multi lateral view, i mean how we, 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 well known about certificates. i don't think that's a political issue. you're talking about indian media. indian media is very diverse issue for us as long as being 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 modeling 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 under the speaker, united states,

united kingdom and center. and so they're all in the media. you will see that by us . but i think there must distinguish between the rhetoric of the media and will be 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 ob, issues with this, with russia on china, on united states, on 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 under pressure. and i can talk about innovative incentives, the real common one is time you come under pressure. i think it is a good fortune that we have how the national leadership does have centered its independence. when we have just seen recently on the water in the un security council in the us taking a real fix on, it does not bandwagon with anybody else. now, like you mentioned

a moment ago and you wrote about that before that both the humanitarian consequences of russia's military operation in ukraine and western economic sanctions that were intended to punish russia without hurting the global community . and so it's like substantial expand, do they do that though in equal measure, do you think they could be compared in terms of that impact? well, i was a significant question. i'm not looking to receive my job, but the fact is that the inflation global inflation triggered by the rising prices are good by that i was in full price. and then the, 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 of the receiving end of the

combined effect of all of and you know, you can get into a blame game who's to blame with the rest is to man. but i think the fact is that you, in the history of this conflict, i would argue both sides and believing in gleaming is irrelevant than geopolitics 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 of what 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, it's also very important point to sort of look at the motivations

a contained 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 who have nothing to do with struggle with, you know, your life. and that's what i was doing. some of my columns with your publisher 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 you know, everybody has been impacted by that really i've been receiving an office on sanctions for a long time. so sanctions auto blunt, and i think it is to say that a conflict between 2 countries scrubbing can bend within those 2 countries, which has happened in many other cases. but the minute around global sanctions. and

that to sanctions huge in some huge thing to national system. i mean, you take, for example, the sanctioning of the national center back. i was reading somewhere that, you know, right to the 2nd one was the bank of international study runs in switzerland, never sanctioned. i spent the german central bank for a close company. the german banks would not sanction. so you know, better than discrimination. and i think traction in central bank certainly is, is something which has hurt us. and most importantly, you know, the pressure in the market to try and just on them saved on by russian on my list. and i sent all of these her don't up in countries and you know, many of us in india i've been right now. this is our, 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 pat, making a decision to lower is oil production despite very having very african american loan 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 wants at this point of time? do you think the pressure have changed in any way? well, 1st of all, that stuff changed in the sense that there's much greater willingness. now to use a financial sector as an instrument of pressure. i've been asked to kind of do it and i'm with you. it makes you see that the instrument of sanctions. i wonder what time, as i said in the past of central banks you never sent,

but now that is happening. so the financial sector that's coming to, you know, spotlight, that's part of stamps. but more importantly, i think the change that has happened in the last 20 years compared to before that particularly for on india is the global average. nobody. and in some ways you see that in the china dependence of chinese companies on the market. so it depends on the law company. so we changed in the global system. economics 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 would still make a distinction between the destination of the states of government. i mean, you talk about opec as 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, then we corporate boards,

a understandable to some extent mr. barton, we have to take a very short break right now, but it will be back in just a few moments station. a ah

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 a very dramatic development. only personally, i'm going to resist. i don't see how that strategy will be successful, very critical time time to sit down and talk ah welcome back to. well, the parts with sunshine are distinguished fellow at the united service institution of india. mr. botto, before the break, we're talking about some, what a divergence stands on national governments may have on politics and doing business

internationally and private companies. and yet, at the same time, i think, perhaps you would agree with me that the, the globalization, as we knew it only, you know, 5 or even 10 years ago. it's not there anymore. and the united states a while trying to punish some of its enemies is undermining these various systems. so let's say at the horizon of 5 or 10 years going forward. which policies, state oriented policies are state oriented intention or private oriented intention of each of them prevail? well, i think suddenly, you know, looking at a 5 year term on 10 year period. so in the state, we already have seen a shift in the last 5 years. so b, as in dog, one of them will be done as non slaughters or

a b on which is self reliant. india, which is essentially a lend to reduce our dependence, particularly for good, not a huge difference or not of use somebody from the chips. you know, who and other are to be sure you don't know that you, that much. to reduce our dependence on other countries. and become much more simply like i, i joke with my friends and we got a ruling party which is about to give them a party. that movie is not like, got a lot of this was a policy of metal in the 50s, of building a sensor light based on the less to capacity and get it. and now once again, we have next phase where because of the challenge of globalization, because of the global trade slowing down. because w a system is no longer working because of tax on sanctions. i think for all these reasons and also from an indian point of view because of the pressure

from china's we're trying to reduce our dependence excel dependence and become more so. and i think that's the next next weekend. now you speak about some for alliance, our bigger involvement of state and the economy, anonymous, things, things that are related to each other. and i think there's a very strong narrative in the way that whenever states role, especially in bigger countries, that can challenge the united states whenever safe role is increased. and that's not, that's a weight. it's you. i talk christie or to talent parent isn't but think we are coming to this very interesting point in history where self sufficiency or warranty i'll be coming in the means of achieving democracy. am i wrong here because it sounds like a paradox, but if more countries are pursuing that own self interest in the democratic system,

internationally seems to be improving well doable democracy. i don't know when you said there was one second. the doing is to been to focus back to solvent. i think what you saw during the globalization was a reduced emphasis on something and idea that's the one to slap thomas friedman on his book on the get on equal trading on long voyages. and therefore, nations audra effects don't democrat, systems weren't always in different directions and for them to continue to be with you. so i don't think, you know, the united states decide what is a democracy in what isn't, isn't that? well, i mean, i understand what democracy you're working on. a domestic level essentially means

that every member of the society or every group has a certain input. it's treated fairly in proportion to its size within the society that everybody's interests are accounted for. and when we translate that 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 profits. it 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 very of interest and trying to integrate them into the decision making? isn't it possible? aren't we already moving towards in that direction? i'm afraid not. now, your system is a bar based system. we talk about, you know, you want to give states. the united nations was constructed on that principle of

equality. but even in constructively, i did mission, major us agree to come on this other number and the more powerful and the less possible. and even within the next organizations, like the mid july of my bank, the big economy, some bigger wides. so in the international system, we have never really practiced dom office cloud based system and will always have that. so i don't think that is going to change much. in fact, if anything, what we are now see is a real question rather than in the session office, no democratic way of dealing with issues. now one of the most interesting discussions in post i circles today is about neo colonialism. and indeed, an efforts to reassert your power as a way of preserving your some would say,

unfair privileges. i think the russians are really trying to frame that struggle with the west than those tribes. they presented as both the own quiet for political and economic sovereignty. but also as an effort to create a more fairly and more air 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 are in the one let our is the currency. and we're in this on the word now, look in countries and she's a global solve our speaking space for them. so i think that is the way i would look at 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 arizona is dominant. china initial seems to be a dominant, a big brother to our smaller neighbors. it's in the nature of international emissions that the currency is all, and therefore the, the, the weak show on this fight against the strong. and when you look at the long run systems which i've been doing, i'm doing some denial of market access in terms of when i looked at one of these in terms of that section of intellectual property, right, which maintain service, you know, global and the quality that is one of the big 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 112 changes in the global system. we want to do much want

to quit to one system, but in order to that struggle continues. but if you look at the level of this down is that exist today, it's pretty clear that they are hurting the powerful change content 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 it 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 study, i do believe that the global system is evolving towards what we call a my diplomat. system, i think, you know, be a saw unit on what you saw, my form 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 in the directional home on monday, the one in which a larger number of countries play a bigger. i mean, it may not be a perfect democracy. you know, a smaller country, let's say like more of these and see may not have the same was as india, i because it's contribution to the global common good is smaller, i mean, no worries. proportionate 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 in the french talk about the multiple of system. if you see the speech of all french a long day that they then they don't follow through on that on that song with it's good to begin with the book a talk about reading on monday. so i just found, we are going to come to a started, you initially see frontier with the home. we are moving towards the most people in our system and whether we foster slow depends on the rents, you know, like what we're seeing right now. right? now let me ask you one last question and this is something that political and it was that rarely asked that i think is absolutely essential to understanding the

design and 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, you know, less powerful goes, but they are all important than they are all make the big can say on. i wonder if he's pulling the stick ontology could be more conductive to the, to multiple and 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 this year

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, multi really just multi lingual. you know, 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 a very dense debate between this pluralist tradition and a growing a session or not majority it is. and i think got some domestic politics. that is what was happening in the country when all of us will be in the list that, you know, the, the slogan has to be unity in diversity. that is the foundation of india and that a city, but construct our unity based on our diversity. i think that's the message of the

new republican. i hope that but it's not a deal media as a nation remain. so that the rest of the world, we have a message. i mean, i used to be just for dr. munoz prime minister. and you repeatedly make this part that india plural nation is a nation of diversity and therefore brings to the world and you, well looking at things and that is our son, and i hope we preserve that character on this. 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 a a

ah, who is the aggressor today? i'm authorizing the additional strong sanctions to day russia. the country with the most sanctions imposed against it. a number that's constantly growing up in your which of the problem was the question? yes, it's become a bill in your senior mostly mine or was sheila were banding all imports of russian oil and gas? who do i suffering of high? i mean, i know they can key of holes with for the, for the little bit when you have regarding joe biden, imposing these sanctions on russia. jo has destroy the american economy. so there's your boomerang

with, it's amazing to see people share, right? because as men, we talk about being strong unami, everybody wants to be strong, man, but you know, we might be physically strong, but you know, are we emotionally weak? my son got incarcerated here. and i learned my biggest fear was and he goes back in the way he had on the board about memory. mama says gray phrase is charles policy. and he said, your son used to say he wish you could come to prison just so he can be with you in the moon with i said this is what.