on the global financial crisis, push the united states to setup d 20 to split the damage and let the brakes leaders to come together for the 1st time to advance the common good. 15 years on which of these 24 months looks more viable or more attractive to the rest of the world, or to discount that i'm now joined by paul and the gira, a brazilian economist and former executive director of the international monetary fund. mr. gary, it's good to see you again. thank you very much for your time. i thank you for having me here. now you've had a very interesting career having served in the old style that is western dominated financial institutions like they are math and also being associated with the new age group. things like breaks and new development bank. i wonder if you find the item that's experienced in any way helpful to sort of observing what's happening with the brakes these days. in many ways. yes. what if i were to select one thing

that i learned from the my experience of 8 years in, in washington, in the math. it is that the current, international monetary and financial system dominated by the united states and its allies, its unreformed level. the system is rigid, it's originally controlled. it has to be, um, when i see the system, i mean the mass, the world bank, the federal reserve, the dollar itself, the swift payment system. all of this has become a set of bullet geopolitical instruments that the wes uses routine the and aggressively to intimidate a restrict and you know, dominate other countries. so this, this is my experience on the front i, i followed a lot for to reform the fund. i spent using he is doing that and my we did a t some things in the context of what you just mentioned,

the financial crisis. when the west was weak, it's sort of made some concessions, but since 2010, since it's 14 years, a whole structure of the fund has been for pros and actually, oh because you understand that because you've written a lot about the us. but the weaponized ation of this institutions, i heard the reputation and ultimately comes back to by the west itself. because the west has use this tool support to its own advantage. how do you understand the logical of doing these mutually exclusive things? variety is you put it well, i mean, this is, i believe a symptom of the decay of the west. the west has to have a bottle, of course, hedge, a monic, but it is a declining force. and the declining force. misuse is the answer is it has, i would say that if we want to change things, we have at least one important ally if we want to change with all the system. this

in fort ally is the united states because it continuously undermines its own currency who is using it to yeah, a lot of people are joking about it, but it undermines it in a very sort of unconscious way. i mean, doing a lot of damage, but the big question is whether there's any good to anyone coming from that, including the united states itself. and when there is no good one, the power is, you know, destroying for the sake of destroying that's, that's pretty dangerous, isn't it? a declining superpower is always dangerous. especially with this, this declining superpower, the united states, has a mindset, deep and green mindset that it has to be the leader that it has to. a flag is orders, as it has to be the dominant player. and because there's a big difference between being a leader and doing borders by the way, and then in fact, the same thing, right, us as a self proclaimed leader. nobody asked them to do play that role with at least not,

not the major countries, but it has play that goal since world war 2. and it's, it has been facing us. i think it's quite clear that it has been facing increasingly difficult. the increasing difficulties and sustaining that superpower now. so we were going to need to, we are living through very turbulent times. witness, which is going on in ukraine. what is going on in the middle east? these are symptoms of, of the aggressive power of destruction, of a superpower. that is, in decline and few is the client now and you have the imap um, they are demonstration of where your work still goes by the word international. and to some extent, you know, it's reflected in structure. uh, so you writing and one of your articles that although virtually all southern states are formally represented, the i'm us government structure, a small coal 4th of western nation states representing 15 percent of the global

population calls all the shots. and i was thinking about it in the context of the american elections when almost everybody gets to vote. but only it's, you know, a few debt to wield real influence. i wonder if that's actually the sort of the root of the problem that the americans truly see that as democratic when you have a representative but not participatory a governance system that they, they're pushing on pretty much the rest of all of us with my indian colleague in the executive board used to say that the international monetary fund is a misnomer should because they should be named the north atlantic monetary funds. because really, it's an alliance between the us and it's, you're being allies, the guns of the fund as the same goes the whole. so the world bank we used to hold some of us used to hope that or overtime the us and you would be, i'm open to change, would come to realize that the institutions they created and control would only be

viable if it becomes a more participated, participatory structure, but what i saw there is a deep resent that a deep resistance and is fund the metal change. we can make some changes in the fund and the world bank. that's possible because medic or no mistake of medic but only to the extent that these changes do not challenge the control, the centralization of decision making in the small committee, which used to call itself the international community. it says it's a 15 percent or less of the total population in the world and it behaves as though it's going to lead to it used to do it easily over the last centuries. but now this time has gone times fast and you'd be ends and especially the americans do not want to recognize this. they want to hold on to, to the power to the privilege default to the title of kyra. but uh, i get the sense that they don't actually want to be sort of is burdened with the

actual work of leading and governing because it takes a lot of time and effort as far as i understand. yeah, they want to dictate, they don't want to really have a dialogue, is like a, let's see. see what do dialogue in reality, what do you, what you see in the international organizations, they no longer multilateral. accept a name, they become as tools. i'll give you an example. the fund needs to support that countries and difficulties if the country and difficulty is seen is uncooperative by the west. it obtains no support for support in very harsh conditions in terms of state or anything. but if the country is friendly, was too politically important to the west, it can receive a norm, this amount of money with little conditions attached. so it's a double standard as all the time to the americans and the b. and so they feel they

need to hold on tight to the structures they have and they're not willing to open space for, for the rest of the world. well, uh the rest of the world doesn't have to ask for their permission to open a new space and i'm in the bricks. is one of the examples of that. i mean, it was created as a revolutionary force. it's not there to combat western influence, at least initially it was there, it's, you know, mind its own business and to create better conditions for the member states. but whenever you try to set up a business in that and monopolist the environment, you are likely to be seen as a threat. this is what i want to ask you about. do you see breaks as a, as a challenge or to the western moto, northern rectory, but in practice and actually uh, while you see, uh, we always use the language of cooperation, peaceful negotiations. but in we the brits would never had been created. i can tell

you that if we had not sense the fact that the west was unwilling to have a 2 dialogue with us initially as a say, we were more inclined to work together because we were rushing to china and the latest very practical, non political way it's more practically working. i participated in that working for the reform of the i, m f and the world back. we managed to obtain some results and then the thing got frozen. so after 2014, after 2012, in reality, we realized that we needed to build on back. so we started constructing a new development back. steroids and shy we constructed the monetary fund of the brakes calls continued reserve arrangements. so we started doing practical things together. and now we're on, on the, on our way, i hope to building alternatives to the monetary system as well. and so i say we are not add to west, we never say we, i to west of course. and you never find the government officials saying what i'm

going to say now, but in fact we uh, we sense the fact that we need to build something independence of the west. god, we're getting back as soon as the word not hostile to the west, but it's a counter hedge, a monic force alternative to force right now is, can i ask you something because development is one of the words that pops up in many of those documents. a math world bang to the united states likes to talk about the brakes also talks about it a lot. and what does development to even me and then the current geo political context? because i can remember a number of countries that had a fairly solid standing by the un millennium development goals, likely been, or syria, which were declared price states and pretty much destroyed supposedly for the benefit of the people. so what is development? in the current circumstance, i believe development in the current circumstance needs to be independent from

western structures. because west instructors have shown you quoted to stock examples, syria and lead them. how many others? what does this show that you cannot develop? if you don't have your own independent means economic, but also military. what is the rush wind rush is showing that the west cannot defeated the military because of pressure is huge. i mean, frustrated is and large country. so large countries like russia, china, brazil, india, can play a role in building, let's say, an umbrella, where countries can develop peacefully and protected from the sort of destructive impulses that the west has. especially the united states. it's, it's something to be investigated more deeply. now, why the u. s. pays and that way. what, why? i mean, uh, that's a curb to for change to do that. how do you understand this ultimate motive to come

and impulse? some conditions on the country that do not only facilitate the actual you know, human mystic development, but also oftentimes do not produce the results desired by the west itself. us as a militaristic society, as, as a militaristic mindset and to, for example, the data, diet data, things live in washington dc was very unpleasant. all sort of electrician, even i'm talking outside the, the math in the math. one thing i noticed, which amazing me even when brazil had agreement to the us on certain positions i agreement was difficult to work with them because they always think that they don't need that support. they don't need alliances. they need, they need fast cells. they need satellites, that's the way they, they think. unfortunately. so cooperation with them has become, i would say practically impossible. of course the governments,

the president governor, can i say that with the business in government and boosted in officials and resilience in general. know this from experience how difficult it is to, to negotiate and to deal with the united states because of their, an intrinsic attitude towards other countries. well, mr. mcgee, or we have to take a short break right now, but we will be back in just a few moments station. the take a fresh look around his life. kaleidoscopic isn't just a shifted reality distortion by power, tired vision with no real opinions. fixtures designed to simplify will confuse who really wants a better wills, and is it just as a chosen few fractured images presented as 1st? can you see through their illusion going underground can

or the welcome back to wells, the parts with follow and the gira, a brazilian economist, and former executive director of the international monetary fund. now, mr. mcgiver, as we've been discussing before, the break there, there's the west, a at one pole with its a developmental model. and then on the other side, they're large countries like russia, china, india, that i believe cannot be developed according to western specifications. it's not only that they don't want to that, but that it's not simply realistic because that would be impossible without losing well just national identity, but the national substance because they're too large for the west to even offer

them anything you know workable. but there are lots of countries in the middle dressing. now there is a good historical moment for those mid sized countries to try to charge their own developmental course by themselves or others still in some way bonded to the sources of either financing or website technology. things are changing. if you look at the world now you see a lot of middle size or even small countries that are, that are moving away from the west and see, look at what's happening in french speaking africa. a lot of countries are rebelling, expelling french forces, questioning french models of, of international relations. and i can tell you, from my experience, the french speaking african countries used to be very disciplined with respect to facts, very, very much satellites. and now 15 years later, i see the move,

but that's going on and africa in latin america. it's a mixed bag, but do have the same. the same situation in asia least asian countries are developing at a very past base, looked at, but not only china, but southeast asia. they did not follow the neo liberal ends in. they never fall on this. you know, the sense that i get is that there are a lot of countries who are truly dissatisfied with, with the system they seed as unfair. they often times see it as abusive. they like to criticize it. and yet they somehow lack the agency or the political will to offer, you know, their own solution. so to try their own course. and they found up continuing relying on be a piece of system and indirectly supporting what's the shortest way out of this. somewhat sad of them is acoustic relationship that is still quite common in the international system. you put it. well,

i agree with the way you summarize to me just tell you that we cannot underestimate the united states and the west in general. they are declining and relative influence. yes. and relative economic size. yes. and relative to the demographic terms. yes. but they're still very powerful, they're declining from a very high stage of development in fallen. so when i say, why am i saying this is because if you look at the political economy of the countries in the glove so called global south, most of them, perhaps all of them are vulnerable to actions taken by the united states and their allies and its allies just give you an example. recently, donald trump said that he would or of what it was, she was not, i agree at all with any attempt to unseat the dollar as the result of the courtesy of the world and even threaten countries that would try to do this with punitive

terrace, of up to $100.00 was on everything the import and export to the united states. now of course, you may say, well donald trump is an outlier in terms of bluffs and aggressive statements, but i think we should make no mistake. united states. it leads as deeply hostile to any attempt to unseat the dollar and just to speak in my own country. i don't want to speak about other countries. brazil has a lot of sectors of it, society and economy and the political c media can universities which i deeply attached to the united states. they look up to the us and they act in, in symphony with us when things become difficult. so. so let's say it's not easy for, for a country, for even a government, what would be, you know, it has 30 say a psychology and it's interest. there is an interesting parallel there that instruct times to be always are sort of referred to to them not to magic ways of

operating the, the ways that to be learned during trauma. but in good times we can afford to advance some more productive ways. and i understand that brazil to what you know, at certain points can, at certain times, can cooperate with china with india, even with ration for example, settle, you know, that transactions and by electrical currents is, but i heard you say that while the countries many countries are doing that on the electrical basis, there is a limit to this sort of policy because sooner or later they will come a time when they would have to set up not a common reserve current. so, but they've come and the reference currency. why would that be needed? and what's the difference between a reference and reserve currencies? i'm glad you asked that because this point is often misunderstood over, overlooked. last to you here in vol die. this point came up, inserted into veterans by the russians present in the meeting, even by president, 14 himself. i got the impression that some people think that settling transacting

and national courtesies would be sufficient. would need that go beyond that. but actually that works for lee. why? because countries need to have a system where they can incur in deficit, sense surpluses. and you can't have that if you don't have, or either you can call it a reference currency or reserve courtesy. the point is that it needs to be a safe asset where you can park part of your reserves at least take, for example, the case of russia in india. the transact mostly in national goods, is now russia has a surplus quite large with india. so it's accumulating, rubies, now the central bank of russian may not want to hold onto these rupees because a currency, the india is not convertible. it's perhaps strong to instability. so what can russia do? it has some alternatives. none of them are good. none of them are perfect. let's put it this way. you can seek investment opportunities in india, for example,

using the rubies to invest in india. but that may be useful and they may be reluctant to open certain sectors of its economy to, for an investment. so originally try alternatively to increase this effort to imports from, from india within services and enter. and it may run into difficulties because it may want to protect certain sectors of the russian economy against inputs of goods and services. so what it was really quite commercial do. a 3rd possibility which hasn't been used is to, to a tiny little operation with countries. 3rd, countries that have interest in receiving robust to use in their relations with, with indian. who would that be? i mean, the china in india with the, perhaps have some know i was thinking of a centralized, okay. that apple of the gulf countries and we have a lot of close proximity to india need rubies. but while i say is this, by this example, sits a show that or a system based purely on national currencies is a good step. yes,

but it's not sufficient. so we need to reference chris and another common misunderstanding the reference. chris is not a unified correct. if it's not like a euro with a common central bank, that's not what's in being discussed. it would be a barrel currency for international transactions and for to serve as a safe reserve asset for the participating countries. now what would it take to come up with something like this? because in rhetoric, a police told the brakes, members, and many of their associated partners ready explore alternative ways of doing business. and they believe that it's that suffering right to trade with one another . and yet for some reason, um, the progress is halted at some point. hope your present little wheelchair. the brakes next to your resume will be the chair, the vix, has said in his statement to kind of in because on some of the said quite clearly we need an alternative means of payment not to replace our currencies,

but to construct a financial system. a new financial system for the multiple world orders that we we want to achieve now. so you said that quite clearly. he said that quite clearly producing present little or has enough. um, lets say political courage to actually put his words into, you know, some action. that's a good question that let's see. let's see. he formulated clearly correctly. but there is a problem. a problem is, i go back, going back to what i said before the united states resist any attempt to unseat the dollar. united states has power to influence backstage in front stage countries that may seek an alternative to the dollar. so you knew you need to muster political will and technical capacity. what have we seen in the discussions among bricks? countries are reluctant to move forward. russian made

a very good proposal for a new settlement system as an alternative to swift. countries agreed to explore the issue, but they did not go beyond that. well, there may be some investment, some incentives offered by the united states itself because if the system is not on a brief, it's also deeply sick. and the american national debt is approaching $36.00 trillion dollars as we speak. do you see any treatment reasonable treatment to that's the problem. that's one of the reasons why we need an alternate to assist the dollar to see a currency can only be trusted if the economy that issues that currency is also trustworthy . and the economy, the united states and other high income countries is, is it is largely unstable fiscal depths that's for, for the foreseeable future high and grow in debts and the tendency to misuse this, the instruments as, as political weapons. so on the one hand we, we realize this,

we brakes, i believe we do. on the other hand, we know, you know, the brakes have a tent, they have a long trench tradition of working by consensus. this may be a trap for us. i believe it's difficult to move away from this tradition because countries are to different the different levels of levels of different interest. and they want those sensitivities and special concerns to be taken into account. so consensus has a lot of support, but what if we know, are we well used to be 5 countries now we're 9 and maybe more in the future. now. how can we work on the basis consensus with a large number of countries diverse and vulnerable? well, i, you can work on the basis of consensus if you understand what the common good really is. i mean, what you are therefore apply from talking, but it's not only an understanding of common good. it's a political economy issue and gave an example. egypt is now full member of the

brakes. you did this under 9 math program. so in, in the age of this very vulnerable to us pressures, the pressures in the execution of. it's how if it is, if it's not cooperative with the west, it may face troubles in dc in the am a full life is always challenging your house, competing with divisions and getting risks. but at the end of the day, if we try to sum up the, the last 15 years so far breaks development compared to, let's say g 20, it doesn't look like brakes has made some real progress forward compared let's say to the, to 20 because it seems to be more of a talking shop or the g 20. i also participated in the g $0.20 and became a leaders form it back in 2008. the last relevant to 20 presidency. was the french want him to add 2011? 0, it's 3 stages, but it's not very effective. but as i say,

it's more talk shop and a talk shop that has become a sort of difficult because you have all the key, the countries that are at loggerheads and the other one have us. and you know, the head, russian, china, and the, the western countries boy caught anything that involves the russia. so the g 20 is broken. it's much less effective than the brakes can be or even the deep 7 in fact is much more effective because it's a small home, a genius group under us leadership, the brakes i, i hope we don't actually continue expanding very quickly. and i hope we realize that consensus cannot be a golden rule. we need to, you know, build a coalition of willing countries. let's say you want to move forward on the base of the russian proposal for an alternative payment system. maybe not all countries would be willing to join. so let's construct a coalition to winning countries and move forward. the others can join later. my my

cuz i know it's difficult. my concern is if we stick to consensus originally with the expanding group, we may not get anywhere. well, if we stick, or if the bricks country stick to a consensus, they would become as formalistic as the west, and perhaps they should learn from the west as well, from its own mistakes. mister, nor do we have to leave it there, but it's been pure delight talking to you again. thank you very much. cause a pleasure. thank you. thank you, and thank you for watching hope to see her again on the was a part the of course the near wes. lots of stuff is a lot going out of the g at the portion of us and that suddenness portions here goes away with the result of the story and bushek 8 or studio and i see for sure

option that this be so for ship. oh for starter home. oh great. so gosh street and you want you to it was a school near welski territory savings. caseras' initial arcos of itself form a ship portion was the find me think about a foot bar stool knew about chavo in gold and the site is close. i you was a car doors, doors board us at ocean and continued to go out and dialed it, building out probably in the sure, the south bay city, high school, both stuck in the south pole. so comfortable at the post and just got a smith gosh, care for which boys coming out on the bus, which is still going to me. so i'm on the policy coverage. the union goes to the i'll go back to normal. yeah, i get to talk about it. there's dorski a whole bunch bundle of g, circa conflict of the some about on they're not, i mean yeah, the stuff i do have both come model stuff. some of

the the we are getting the center of garage. what's the city surprisingly is almost entirely can tax the spots a baffled wage for a month to all day because the funds to international needing to network to approval from i don't dance with public logistics. health is being taken by russian training to merican dream bonds in los angeles spending at least 16 people in destroying mouldings, 12000 building. well, 1st in 5 in defend california governor over the 5th public side. they ask you, we've got to deal with this misinformation. i think you're getting a bad rap about police fire, i don't have enough water around.