and don't forget to follow us on odyssey rumble and gab, thanks for joining in. we'll see about next hour. ah ah ah ah ah ah, welcome towards the part,

the east west power struggle accentuated by the war in your brain and rising tensions over taiwan has temporarily leaves. and now the 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 right, to break this exploitative arrangement. well discuss it now joined bias and jaya barrow distinguish tallow at the united service institution of india. mr. baron, 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 elephants fighting or making law the grass underneath them. yes. trembled. and if we extend that metaphor to the geopolitical situation in the world today,

not just the grad underneath them to get the fact that it's the valleys and villages of miles away. g, 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 understand. the question is, what i've been doing about the fact is that the don't looking one has been dealing with a very difficult to 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 west after the 2nd world war is traditionally dominated, also by the rest. but even in multilateral organizations, are dominated by major us. so what is now called the global sound,

which is essentially a, don't a big countries on it used to be called hardware and, and all it is you're good of 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. 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 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. well, 1st of all,

in practical terms in doing well, this had an independence on, but see, i've been trying to get my republic in mind to talk to someone. it does have different names used to call it non alignment. then we talk about started to go to me. but essentially, the quarter in policy towards the rest of the work is to have an independent or policy of decisions based on our last test and, and understanding that we are a nation that india like china, like russia, like a europe of mainland europe and many other universities in latin america of the population . we had a similar national entity. and we have seen our films as a country that has a message based on the longest pre authorization, 5000, you know, history of us in the 1st of a deep belief in our identity that we hope to have an independent voice. and

whether it was in the past or be able to watch by or monsoon. 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, i'm a 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 ground it is in the, in these multi lateral 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 in 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 are bothered 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 are linked to the word. so there's a much greater influence on the 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 all out of the united states,

united kingdom are those trade center. and some of them fall 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 use of the gum. 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, 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 under pressure. and i can talk about innovative incentives. the real common one is time you come under pressure. i think it is our 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, india has taken a view off 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 you think is success, dental expand? do they do that though in equal measure? do you think they could be compared in terms of that impact? well, i was so difficult to question, i'm not looking to do sequence measure, but the fact is that the nation global inflation triggered by the rising price goodbye, that i was in full price. and then the, the, the disconnect in the financial system, if you can all make sanctions imposed by the united states and the nature of ours, all of them together are certainly back to us when we are we and, and you read that know, looking would have been at the receiving end of the combined effect of all of and

you know, you can get into a blend game who's to blame with the rest just to man. but i think the fact is that you, in the history of this conflict, i would argue both sides. and i think i'm leaning in gleaning 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 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 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

a contained war for, for the concrete interest, various versus essentially a helicopter style action that affects everybody and very, very little consideration for, you know, 3rd parties will have nothing to do with struggle. well, you know, you're right and that's what i with some of my columns which are published or to go back to march, april this year, beginning of law. still it is that sanctions, most of all are blunders that do not distinguish the targets. you'll see the impact of what example us sanctions on the, on how you know, everybody has been impacted. but really i've been receiving an office done sanctions for a long time. so sanctions on a blunt instrument, 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 round,

global sections and the 2 sections which in summers reach, things natural 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 sanctioned. i spent the german central bank for a close company. the german banks will not sanction so you know, better than discrimination. and i think sanctioning central bank certainly is, is something which has hurt us. and most importantly, you know, the pressure on the market to try and just on them saying, don't buy russian on my list. a lawyer sent all of these heard no, nothing 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 on 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 opec making a decision to lower it's oil production despite very heavy and very african american loan being, it's clear that americans scope of influence even with, 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 masses of 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 instrumental pressure, i've been asked to kind of do it and i'm with nomics. you see that the instrumental sanctions? i wonder what time i sent in the past of central banks you have never sent,

but now that is happening. so the financial sector that a spotlight has bought a sense. 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 average. nobody. and in some ways, you see that anyone with china dependence of chinese companies on the market for example, dependence. a lot of companies will change 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 is an organization of government. so and when it comes to doug with you stand by national interest, when it comes to private companies, then we got better 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 ah

ah, i welcome back to one of the parts with sunshine, our distinguished fellow at the united service institution of india, mr. botto, before the break, we're talking about somewhat a diversion 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 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 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 called a beyond which is self reliant. india, which is essentially meant to reduce our dependence, particularly if i didn't acknowledge the difference or not of use somebody come back to it. you know, so, and i think we should have done that. and then you get to reduce our dependence on other countries and 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 matter in the 50s, of building a sensor and i didn't based on the rest of the day. and now once again, we had a next phase where because of the challenge of globalization, because of the global change to a go w d modular to changing system is no longer looking because the tax on sanctions, i think for all these reasons and also from an indian one to the plug or the pressure from china on us. we are trying to reduce our dependence, extend them dependence, and become more social. and i think that's the next week. now you speak about self 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 i talk chrissy or to tell in parent is, but i think we are coming to the very interesting point in history of our self sufficiency or someone t i becoming a means of achieving democracy. am i wrong here? is it because it sounds like a paradox, but if more countries are pursuing their own self interest, the democratic system internationally seems to be improving one global democracy, i don't know understand what this one is certainly doing is to bring the focus back to solve it. i think what you saw doing the globalization was reduced emphasis on something. and the idea that the one to slap from a screen on board to select the trading on equal terms, i took

a better long with the kids and therefore missions auto center. yes. all that is said, that's part of the don't know kind of systems like on the one that always a different direction. and therefore, that i don't think, you know, the united states are going to decide what is a democracy and what is not what isn't, 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 and proportion to its size within the society that everybody's interests are accounted for. and when we translate that to the international system, it will be working, it would be working in the same as a fashion. so countries big and small, it doesn't mean that they have the same amount of influence,

but at least that interest would be taking into account then the global process could be structured in a way not to penalize or ostracize one or the other. in this answer, what 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 i'm, we already moving in that direction. i don't read on the system a system of talk about, you know, one of your states of the united nations was constructed on that principle of equality. what do you want in constructively admissions, with the un security council, of which you have to know them. and the more often the less often and even within mug election organizations with july i'm one of the big economy, some of the goals. so in the international system we have no, it really is dom office. it's a fall based system. and

a list of i have, so i don't think you know, that is going to change much in fact, of anything. what we are now see is a real question of a social offer. no democratic way of dealing with issues. now one of the most interesting discussion of 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 than those tribes. they presented as both the own client for political and economic sovereignty, but also as an effort to create a more fairly, a more affair and international system. what do you think about that? do you think western had you want to conditions a colonial at that very core?

well, so just the last 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 is on equal was now looking countries, and she's a global solve our seeking 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 this all of the major part of the soviet union, which is no longer there. but russia, in its own area, is a dominant china initial seems to be a dominant some excuse 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 international emissions that the currency is all,

and therefore the, the, the weak show on this plan again is a strong. and when you look at the long run systems which continue, i'm done so benign market back says in terms of the quantities, in terms of functional intellectual property, right, which maintain service, you know, global inequality. that is one of the big one was fighting against when we talked about a new international economic already, the eighty's and ninety's and, and many of us. and the other thing was, wanted changes in the global system. we wanted of much want to put one system. but in order to that struggle continues, if you look at the global dis, downstairs that exist today, it's pretty clear that they are hurting, be powerful chase and more even than smaller countries. because the united states is no longer capable of maintaining its alliances. and, you know, investing in down to the extent that it used to do that before. i wonder if i'm

more fair distribution is that not only is that of an ideological or moral, but the necessity of one in time. because, you know, having your neighbor or your who even and me guess something that it's once ultimately serves you as well because it creates a more predictable meditation. don't you think that the time itself is calling for 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 is probably the real version to that

you're moving in that direction. a home on monday to call no one to reach a larger number of countries play a bigger or, i mean, it may not be a perfect democracy. you know, a small country let's say like more abuse. and that i can see that are the same ways and because it's contribution to the global, common good is smaller, i mean are, is proportionate to what you bring to the table. you know, so the direction in which you're moving in my judgement, these are multiple us and the current crisis will accentuate that process. and i think the, the west or didn't united states, i think europe has come to terms with what example in 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 up on that on that talk with is good to begin with the books a talk about reading on monday. so i

believe family are going to come to a started, you initially come to the center or the whole we are moving towards the most people in our system and whether the foster slow depends on the rent or like what we're seeing 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 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 all make the big pantheon. i wonder if the pulling, the stick ontology could be more conductive to the multiple. and one that we've been talking about, especially in the view that is said to assume the leadership, the presidency of both g 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 ourselves in the last 75 years that we have been to the public that we are multicultural, motivated, just multilingual. know in many ways, many a mission. and therefore we bring plurality block thinking,

not just about ourselves, what i want to work. 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 that some domestic on that is what was happening within the country. when all of us who believe in the list that you know, the slogan has to be unity in diversity. none of the foundation of india and the list below and i were city, but construct our unity based on our by what i think that's the message of the intended public. and i hope that that knowledge, india, 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 will looking at things. and that is austin and i hope we preserve that character on it. 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 with ah, ah, ah,

[000:00:00;00] a year ah, breaking news from nepal where at least 16 people have reportedly died in a plane crash at the country's international airport. the russian defense ministry says he is preparing a provocation to blow up a large granary and acute moscow of disrupting the brain. deal in this week, stop stories. moscow confirmed its military has taken full control of the strategic town of sola dar in the don. yes. republic, after months of ruling battles ah,