a was based on on last you interest and understanding that we are the foolish nation, that india, china like russia, like a europe of mainland europe, and many others who are still introducing latin america of the population. we had a civilizational entity and we have seen our films as a country that has a message based on the long history of authorization. 5000, you know, history of us. and the 4th of it deeply for a identity that we have to have an independent voice. and whether it was in the past or be able to watch by on to the, to my well, everyone has had an independent, wasn't international affairs all, but i think there is definitely this trico i 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 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 grounded 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 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, it is the indian political issue you're talking about indian media. indian 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 therefore in the media, you will see that bias. but i think we must distinguish between the rhetoric of the media, hoping in the media and the use of the gum. i think government and india successively including the present government have taken an independent position. we have tried to bill 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 incidents that come under pressure one each time you come under pressure. i think it is a good fortune that we have had a national leadership that does a centered its independence when you're just seen recently on the water in the un security council, in the us taking a real fix on it does not bandwagons with anybody else. now, you mentioned the moment to go and you wrote about that before then 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. to a central extent, 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 price goodbye, that i was in 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 when we are, we in india read that know, looking would have been of 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 1st name on the west, just to man. but i think the fact is that you in the history of this contract, i would argue both sides and believing in gleaming is irrelevant and geopolitics because you 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 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 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. yeah, you're right,

and that's what i was doing. some of my columns was for publish to to go back to march april this year, beginning of the facilities that sanctions, most of all out of blood is to them. they do not distinguish the targets. you'll see the impact of what example us sanctions on iran and how, you know, everybody has been impacted by that really i've been receiving an office on sanctions for a long time. so sanctions are 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 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 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 fracturing central bank certainly 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've sent all of these her don't up in countries 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 pac making a decision to lower is oil production despite very heavy and 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 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 instrumental pressure. i've been asked to kind of do it and i'm with you. it makes you see that the instrumental sanctions, i wonder what time in the past of central banks would never sent, but now that is happening. so the financial sector, that's a spotlight that's part of the concern. 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,

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, dr. what 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 corporate boards and 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 ah, the claims of the king of the belgians leopold the 2nd to the congo were finally authorized by the leading european countries in 1885 in the very heart of the african continent. a state under the rule of the belgian monarch was declared since the beginning, the congo free state was total may him for the local population and functioned as

a universal concentration camp. the majority of the population, including women and children, were forced to work on the rubber plantations. those who failed to fulfill their quota were beaten and mutilated to keep the congolese people under control. the king set up the so called forest bleak which were punitive detachments that cast terror on the captured country and its inhabitants. fearing that their subordinates would simply waste bullets hunting for wild animals. the officers demanded that the soldiers gave an answer for every bullet used, and as proof presented a chop hand of an african, it was not uncommon when trying to justify the use of the ammunition. the colonist amputated the hands of not only those who were dead, but also of those who were kept alive. the atrocious exploitation of the congo turned into a real genocide. in only 20 years, the policy of the belgians led to the death of nearly 10000000 people alongside the

holocaust, that genocide of the congo population is considered to be one of the grimmest pages in the history of mankind. ah ah ah ah ah welcome back to well,

the parts with fungi barrel distinguished fellow at the united service institution of india, mr. botto. before the break, we're talking about this 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 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 if you're looking at a 5 year term on 10 year period, so in the i'm see greater than one to the state. we already have seen a shift in the last 5 years a month, and then the movie got one as nonce waters are on it. uh, yeah, we just send 3 lines. india, which is essentially went to reduce our dependence, particularly for critical technologies, difference or not of use somebody from the chips, you know, food, and i've got a lot of these to reduce our dependence on other countries and become much more centralized. i joke with my friends in the got a ruling party which is a party that movie is now like, got a lot of this was a policy of metal in the fifty's of building a sensor. and i do based on the list of capacity and get it. and now once again,

we have that space where because of the challenge of globalization, because of the global trade slowing down. because w a system is no longer looking 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 external dependence and become more centralized. and i think that's the next next weekend. now you speak about self reliance, 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 a states role, especially in bigger countries, that can challenge the united states whenever safe role is increased. and that's a wait, it's you, i talk christie or to tell in parent isn't but 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 walker. see, i don't know understand. well because you know, want to do is to bring the focus back to solve it. i think what you saw doing the at all globalization was reduced emphasis on sunday. and the idea that the one to slap thomas friedman 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 on it. yes. that is something that's part of the don't know credit systems like on the one to log with different

types 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 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 in proportion to its sides within the society that everybody's interests are accounted for. and when we translate out to the international system, it has 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 lisa interest 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? and we already and moving towards in that direction. i don't want no system as a bar based system. we talk about, you know, you want to just state the united nations, was constructed on the principle of equality. but even in constructively admissions, we need to us agree to come, some of which you have to remember. and the more powerful and the less possible. and even within the next organizations, now you can always shoot like the dummy july bank, the big economy, some bigger lines. so in the international system, we have never really factors demarcus. it's cloud based system and will always have that rate. so i don't think that is going to change much effective anything. what we are now see is a real personal rather than in the session office now democrat dealing with

issues. now one of the most interesting discussions in polish i circles today is about neo colonialism and indeed an effort 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. i struggle with the west and those times they presented us both that own life for political and economic sovereignty, but also as an effort to create a more fairly apparent international system. what do you think about that? do you think western had demonic ambitions? a colonial and they're very form. 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 where our is the currency. and we're in this on the word now look and 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 one 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 some accuse of being a dominant, bought and sold a big brother to our smaller neighbors. it's the nature of international relations that the currency is paula, and therefore the, the, the week should all this, again, is a strong. and when you look at the long run systems, we continue, i'm doing some denial of market a qualities in terms of the assumption of intellectual property, right,

which will maintain service, you know, global inequality. 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 have 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 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 it once ultimately serves you as well because it creates a more predictable expectation. 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 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 is probably the real to do that. we're moving in the direction of more money to follow the world in which a larger number of countries play a bigger. i mean, it may not be a democracy. you know, a smaller country, let's say like more abuse. and they're going to see may not have the same was as

india, it's contribution to the global common good is smaller. i mean, that worries proportionate to what you bring to the table. yeah. so the, the direction in which, you know, 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 one 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 up on that on that talk with. it's good to begin with the buck a talk about monday. so i can, family are going to come to a started to go home in issue see, come to the center or what's on the home. we are moving towards the most people in

our system and whether we foster slow differential events 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're all important than they are 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 view that is that 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 our sense in the last 75 years that we have been that we are multicultural, multi really just multilingual. you know, in many ways, many of the mission and therefore we bring plurality blocking. not just about ourselves what i want to work. unfortunately in india, we now have already done debate between this pluralist tradition and a growing assertion all my daughter did it. and i think that some domestic on that is what was happening in the country. well,

all of us will be in the bottom of the call. the slogan has to be unity in diversity. none of 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 republic, and 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 a newer prime minister and you were repeatedly making that india plural. mission is a nation of diversity and therefore brings to the world. and you were 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. barrett 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 again. well,

the part a a check in we all came out together. we were all supposed to go home together. it didn't happen. and that's just shot after shot after shot after shot derrick was asking, where's tory, where's course she could hear them say d,

o a at the see. we knew he was go to manage kamani carter, and i'm currently starting a license for a gang related drive bought to have been 9 years ago. my big luciana, she was also a student who is attending college. his name is corey pittman. very young kids. it seems we're getting involved and horrendous violence. 20 to 30 years ago. i think there's no question that the kitchen cripps from ballet came up here and see it in this area. all my friends is either in prison now forever or day. probably because 7 years with just wanted to i will said is this we craft and so sorry you know,

uh community like oh i, i dont then for me to move it and i'm from my that you know through for the diesel superscript if you them. yeah. kids get you physically more visible to pay a visit to loan with weapons who is the best food in the profit with dick and i'm just kind of a big gladstone. this is sunday, a shipment with

dozens of passengers die in a plane crash. and in a paul's international airport, the countries with disaster in 3 decades under this week top stories moscow confirmed, this military is taking control of the strategic town of paula done that the public, not the months of incense by saying no country, no people have the right to force african countries in their people to take sides. that's beijing statement that africa shouldn't be an arena for competition between western countries. china, new for minister wraps up his 5 nation trip across africa with

.