it has to be done when i say this is, i mean, the mass, the world bank, the federal reserve, the dollar itself, the swift payment system. all this has become a set of bull, a geopolitical instruments that the wes uses routinely and aggressively to intimidate, restrict, and you know, dominate other countries. so this, this is my experience and the fun i've, i've, i felt a lot for to reform the fund. i spend use and he is doing that. and my, we did a to 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, the whole structure of the fund has been for pros. no, cause you understand that because you've written a lot about the us. but the weaponized ation of this institutions hurts 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 logic 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 be off, of course, hedge a monic, but it is a declining force. and the declining force miss uses the instruments 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 the other system this and forth allies 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 when 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 supervisor, the united states, has a mindset, the pin grand 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 elaina and even borders by the way, and then it yeah, in fact, the same thing right, us as a self proclaimed leader. nobody asked them to do play that role of at least not, not the major countries, but it has played 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 super ballinger. 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 super power that is in decline and fused as to 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 of 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 big the world 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. it 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 hope some of us used to hope that 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 more participated. participatory structure. but what i saw there is a deep resent that a deep resistance, any fund the metal change, we can make some changes in the fund and the will bank best possible, because medic or no mistake has medic but only to the extent that these changes do

not challenge the control, the centralized zation of decision making in the small committee, which used to call itself the international community that says just a 15 percent or less of the total population in the world. and it behaves as though it's going to lead to. it is used to do it easily a last centuries, but now this time is gone times best 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 that a lot of lots of so see what the dialogue, in reality would do, 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 big countries and difficulties if the country and difficulty is seen is uncooperative by the west. it obtains no support or support in very harsh conditions in terms of the to everything. 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 double standard is all the time to the americans and the dns, they feel they need to hold on tight to the structures they have and they're not waiting 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 bricks. is one of the examples of that. i mean, it wasn't 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 model? northern rhetoric, but in practice and actually what you see uh we always use the language of cooperation, peaceful negotiations. but in we the bridge 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. brazil rushing to china and leaders for very practical non political way. it's more practically working. i participated in that working for the reform of the i math and the world back. we managed to obtain

some results and then the thing got frozen. so after 2014, have to try the 12 are in reality. we realized that we needed to build our own path, so we started constructing a new development back steroids and shine guy. we constructed a monetary fund of the bricks, 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. and to west, we never say we are the west. of course, 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 a, we're not hostile to the west, but it's a counter hedge, a monic force alternative to the 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 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 being 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 libya, have 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,

or the west cannot defeated the military because of pressure security germany. russia is in 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 us 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, and pull 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 an militaristic society, as this militaristic mindset and to, for example, the data data data the 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 amazed me even when brazil had agreement with the us on certain positions i agreement was difficult to work with them because they always think that they don't need the support. they don't need alliances. they need, they need fast, self feeding 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 and government, and visiting officials and brazilians in general know this from experience. how difficult it is to, to negotiate and to deal with the united states because of the or intrinsic attitude towards other countries. well, mr. in a day or we have to take a short break right now, but we will be back in just a few moments station. the

release of the russian states. never as one of the most sense community. not getting hold of all sense and up the speed, the one else holes. question about this, even though we will fan in the european union the kremlin mission, the state on the russians to day and split the ortiz full neck, even our video agency, roughly all the band on youtube, the services for the question, did you say they requested the

welcome back to wells, the parts with follow and the gira, a brazilian economist on form executive director of the international monetary fund . now i'm assuming the gear, as we've been discussing before the break there, there is the west, a at the one pole with its a developmental model. and then on the other side, they're large countries like russia, china, india, the, and 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 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 it is a good historical moment for those mid sized countries to try to charge their own developmental course by themselves. or are there still in some way bonded to the sources of either financing or let's say technology. things are changing it to 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 you have the same. the same situation in asia, leased asian countries are developing at a very past base. look at what, not only china, but southeast asia. they did not follow the neo liberal agenda. they never fall on this. do you know, the sense that i get is that they 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. i mean, yeah, they somehow lack the agency or the political will to or for, you know, the own solution. so to chart their own course. and they found up continuing relying on the abusive system and indirectly supporting it. what's the shortest way

out of this? somewhat settlements. i q stick relationship that is still quite common in the international system. you put it. well, i agree with the way you summarize that. let me just tell you that we cannot underestimate the united states in the west. in general. they are declining and relative influence. yes. and relative, you cannot of size. yes. and relative to the demographic terms. yes. but they're still very powerful. they are declining from a very high stage of development in falling. so when i say, why am i saying this is because if you look at the political economy of the countries in the globe circle and global south, most of them, perhaps all of them are vulnerable to actions taken by the united states and their allies and his allies just give you an example. recently donald trump said that he would as 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 glass and the rest of statements, but i think we should make no mistake. united states, a lease is deeply hostile to any attempt and see 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 see media in universities which i deeply attached to the united states. they look up to the us and they act in, in symphony with the us when things become difficult. so, so it's a, it's not easy for, for a country, for even a government while the,

you know, it has 30, say a psychology and its interest. there is an interesting parallel there that instruct times we always are sort of referred to, to not to magic ways of operating the, the ways that to be learnt 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 call parades with china with india, even if it's ration for example, settle, you know, that transactions and by electrical currents is. but i heard you say that while the countries many countries i do that on the biological 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 in 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. he and involved by this point came up in certain dimensions

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 either you can call it a reference currency or reserve currency. the point is that it needs to be a safe asset where you can park part of your reserves at least to take, for example, the case of russia and 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 russia may not want to hold onto these rubies because occurrences, 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 it for an investment. so originally drive alternatively to increase this effort to imports from, from india within services and into 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 was the quote conversion to a 3rd possibility which hasn't been used is to do a tiny little operation with countries. 3rd, countries that have interest in receiving a robust to use in their relations with, with indian. who would that be? i mean the china and india with the perhaps have some know i was thinking of a central script 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, shuts a show that 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 current, so it's not like a euro with a comic 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, at least all the breaks members and many of their associated partners, ready explore alternative ways of doing business. and they believe that is that suffering right? to trade with one another. and yet for some reason, um the progress is halted at some point. you know, present blue chair. the brakes next to your resume will be the chair of the bricks

. has said in his statement to cousin, because i'm sending it to you 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 so he said that quickly he said that quite clearly in producing present little a has enough. um, lets say political courage to actually put his words into you know, some action. yeah, that's a good question that let's see. let's see. he formulated clearly and 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 see the dollar. united states has power to influence backstage and fund 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? the 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 only abuse, if it's also deeply sick, the american national debt is approaching $36.00 trillion dollars as we speak. do you see any treatment reasonable treatment to that problem? that's one of the reasons why we need an alternate assist, the dollar you see occurring, so you can only be trusted if the economy that issues that currency is also trustworthy. and these economy, the united states and other high in countries, is, is it is largely unstable fiscal depth. it's so for the foreseeable future, high and glowing 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 10, 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 different, the different levels of income and levels of different interest, and they want their sensitivities and special concerns to be taken into account. so consensus has a lot of support. but what if we know, are we, we're 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 give you an example. egypt is now full member of the, the brakes. you did this under 9 last 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 and the am a full life is always challenging your house. competing with divisions in getting risk smith at the end of the day if we try to some of the, the last 15 years so far breaks development compared to, let's say g 20 it doesn't that look like bricks has made some real progress forward compared, let's say to the g 20 because it seems to be more of a talking shop or the v 20. i also participated in a d 20 since it became a readers form it back in 2008. the last relevant g 20 presidency,

was the french one into our 2011. 0, it's 3 stages, but not very effective. but as i say, it's more talk shop and a talk shop that is 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 have, on the other hand, russian, china and the, the western countries boycott anything that involves the russia. so the g 20 is broken. it's much less effective than the brakes can be for you. the deep 7 in fact is much more effective because it's a small a. how about genius group under us leadership? the bricks 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 correlation 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 the coalition of willing countries and move forward. the others can join me later. my, my, cuz i know it's difficult. my concern is if we stick to consensus rigidly with the expanding group, we may not get anywhere. well, if we stick, or if the bricks country stick to consensus, they would become as formalistic as the west. and perhaps they should learn from the west as well, from its own mistakes just in a day or 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 once, a part the in february 2022 ukraine, the game, the world's number one, new story ukraine,

ukraine. ukraine crane pressure truth invited to a crane named loan for spring test. ukraine suffering from russian language shows, we seen the main stream media and the nightly numerous were citing clean developed scripts that essentially say exactly the same thing. using the buzz words of this as a threat to our democracy. when you see 10 different channels exactly that sentence, you know that it's the central intelligence agency script. the role of p r firms in ukraine, throughout europe in to united states really can be overstated. it's quite different than a, as in previous decades where there used to be more of a culver role of propaganda, government propaganda operations. now, this is just celebrated as p r in helping ukraine and helping get their message out in terms of the kinase who's pulling the strings and who is profiting the

. if you think about russia, what does your mind picture the bottom landscapes open up before your eyes? the what one does. you imagine the, the discounts dodge the journey, the, the, you ready to come along the,

the, we are in the center of good rock from the city. surprisingly eas, what was entirely, in fact, the spots a baffled wage for a month. p o r t becomes the 1st international news network report, some of 2 nets for public logistics top that's been taken by russian troops. so vakio warns it will to aid to crane and floods. zaleski doesn't resume the transfer of russian gas to europe. and renewed controversy between france and the african states as president emanuel. my crohn criticizes the continental for not showing proper recognition of french policies in the region that comes to several countries declare paris should withdraw.