# Why are Trump and Putin Racing to End the Ukraine War? | Geeta's World, Ep 119

An episode of [Geeta's World](https://invisiblenetwork.ai/podcast/1635741757), 25 Feb 2025, 39 min.

Audio: https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/api.spreaker.com/download/episode/64562528/25_feb_25_geeta_25_feb_128.mp3

The Ukraine war has now entered its fourth year, with European leaders intensifying peace efforts amid growing uncertainty over U.S. support. With diplomatic talks gaining momentum, could this be the turning point for peace? Or will the conflict continue with no end in sight? Watch for the latest developments as global powers navigate the future of Ukraine. In this episode of Geeta's World, our host, Shashank Mattoo, and the foreign affairs editor at India Today, TV Today Network, Geeta Mohan, discuss! Produced by Prateek Lidhoo Sound Mix by Rohan Bharti

## Transcript

[0:00] Speaker 1: This is in here today podcasts.
[0:05] Speaker 2: We saw earlier this week.
[0:07] Speaker 1: Earlier last week, we saw the meeting between American and
[0:11] Speaker 1: Russian diplomats in Saudi Arabia.
[0:13] Speaker 2: This is a big meeting.
[0:14] Speaker 1: The two sides walked away saying that, look, we are
[0:17] Speaker 1: positive and confident about the possibility that we could end
[0:20] Speaker 1: the Ukraine War and have positive discussions towards meeting. Both
[0:24] Speaker 1: sides needs from a potential negotiation. What do you think
[0:28] Speaker 1: could we see the end of the Ukraine War in
[0:30] Speaker 1: the coming weeks and months.
[0:31] Speaker 3: The very same America at one point in time when
[0:34] Speaker 3: they didn't like the face of China. I'm not naming
[0:37] Speaker 3: the leader China per se, they'd call Shijin paying a dictator,
[0:41] Speaker 3: and they'd say, let's focus our energies on getting this
[0:44] Speaker 3: dictator out. When was Putin? If they considered him a dictator,
[0:48] Speaker 3: when was he not a dictator? He was a part
[0:50] Speaker 3: of the G eight, When was he not a dictator?
[0:53] Speaker 3: For them not to continue engaging Putin? They didn't like
[0:57] Speaker 3: his face, they did not like the response Putin to
[1:01] Speaker 3: America after the Euromadan protests and taking over of Crimea,
[1:06] Speaker 3: throwing Russia out of the G eight, and now he's
[1:10] Speaker 3: also a dictator. He's a bigger villain than Chichin paying
[1:15] Speaker 3: for Trump.
[1:16] Speaker 1: A lot of critics of Trump are raising at this point.
[1:18] Speaker 1: They're saying that, look, you are willing to sideline your
[1:20] Speaker 1: European allies as well as put Ukraine on the table
[1:22] Speaker 1: and give the Russians what they want because you want
[1:25] Speaker 1: to engineer some sort of.
[1:26] Speaker 2: Divide between Russia and China.
[1:28] Speaker 1: Even if you give Russia what it wants on Ukraine,
[1:30] Speaker 1: can you really engineer the kind of split that you
[1:32] Speaker 1: want and leave China more alone, more isolated, so it'll
[1:35] Speaker 1: be more amenable toy or pressure. Can you really engineer
[1:38] Speaker 1: in these two countries?
[1:39] Speaker 3: I really don't think so. I don't think realistically they
[1:42] Speaker 3: can drive a wedge. There is no splitting. There's only
[1:45] Speaker 3: how can you use Would America want Russia or China
[1:50] Speaker 3: to use a China card or a Russia card against
[1:52] Speaker 3: American interests?
[1:58] Speaker 1: Hello, I'm Shashanka with India Today TV's Foreign Affairs editor
[2:02] Speaker 1: Keita Mohan.
[2:03] Speaker 2: Where with Geta's astute.
[2:05] Speaker 1: And incisive grasp of world affairs, we delve into all
[2:08] Speaker 1: that is urgent and pressing in world politics and comprehend
[2:12] Speaker 1: how these developments in other countries could shape India's global
[2:15] Speaker 1: ambitions of being a visual group. Let's unravel Keitha's World. Hello,
[2:21] Speaker 1: welcome back to Githa's World, Indian Today's flagship podcast on
[2:25] Speaker 1: foreign affairs with our foreign affairs editor Guita Mohan, where
[2:28] Speaker 1: once a week we sit down and layout really the
[2:31] Speaker 1: key issues or one key issue that we tackle in
[2:34] Speaker 1: the episode for the week that has been making global headlines.
[2:37] Speaker 1: And of course no issue has made global more global
[2:40] Speaker 1: headlines than the US Russia talks that have taken place
[2:42] Speaker 1: in Saudi Arabia to.
[2:43] Speaker 2: End the Ukraine War.
[2:45] Speaker 1: But on the sidelines of that lots of tensions between
[2:47] Speaker 1: America and also with its allies in Europe and with Ukraine.
[2:52] Speaker 1: Where exactly is this conflict going to go? So are
[2:54] Speaker 1: we close to seeing the end of a conflict that
[2:56] Speaker 1: has reached on for three years to the date. So
[3:00] Speaker 1: Gita Mohan is now going to join us and explain
[3:03] Speaker 1: what is going on.
[3:05] Speaker 2: We saw earlier this week.
[3:07] Speaker 1: Earlier last week, we saw the meeting between American and
[3:11] Speaker 1: Russian diplomats in Saudi Arabia.
[3:13] Speaker 2: This is a big meeting.
[3:14] Speaker 1: The two sides walked away saying that look, we are
[3:17] Speaker 1: positive and confident about the possibility that we could end
[3:20] Speaker 1: the Ukraine War and have positive discussions towards meeting both
[3:24] Speaker 1: sides needs from a potential negotiation. What do you think
[3:28] Speaker 1: could we see the end of the Ukraine War in
[3:30] Speaker 1: the coming weeks and months.
[3:32] Speaker 3: They certainly are being pushed to come to the negotiating table,
[3:36] Speaker 3: and that push, I suppose maybe was required. And there
[3:42] Speaker 3: were a lot of compromise in the past that nobody
[3:44] Speaker 3: was willing to make because you had Europe and America
[3:48] Speaker 3: on Ukraine side. All that has changed, you know, Shushank,
[3:52] Speaker 3: There was a time and it's actually particularly telling to
[3:58] Speaker 3: see how geopolitics works because the very same America at
[4:02] Speaker 3: one point in time when they didn't like the face
[4:04] Speaker 3: of China. I'm not naming the leader China per se,
[4:08] Speaker 3: they'd call Chijin Ping a dictator and they'd say, let's
[4:11] Speaker 3: focus our energies on getting this dictator out. And you
[4:15] Speaker 3: had when was Putin if they considered him a dictator,
[4:19] Speaker 3: when was he not a dictator? He was a part
[4:21] Speaker 3: of the G eight, When was he not a dictator?
[4:24] Speaker 3: For them not to continue engaging Putin? They didn't like
[4:27] Speaker 3: his face, they did not like the response Putin gave
[4:31] Speaker 3: to America after the Euromathan protests and taking over of Crimea,
[4:37] Speaker 3: throwing Russia out of the G eight. And now he's
[4:40] Speaker 3: also a dictator. He's a bigger villain than Chi Jin
[4:45] Speaker 3: Ping for Trump, right, sorry, the other way around. He's
[4:50] Speaker 3: now not a villain, but he was a bigger a
[4:51] Speaker 3: villain than Chi Chin Pin for Biden. And it has
[4:55] Speaker 3: the roles of reverse. So you know, these are strange times.
[4:58] Speaker 3: We have to wait it out. I just suppose that,
[5:00] Speaker 3: you know, India was better placed. But in terms of negotiations,
[5:07] Speaker 3: Zi Lenski is going to have a very difficult time
[5:10] Speaker 3: that anybody who sees at least for the next four years.
[5:13] Speaker 3: Can he hold on for the next four years. I
[5:18] Speaker 3: don't think so, because if he could, if he could
[5:21] Speaker 3: hold on for the next four years, then maybe we
[5:24] Speaker 3: would see tides changing, right, But I don't think he
[5:28] Speaker 3: can hold on for the next four years without American help,
[5:31] Speaker 3: And I don't think Trump is willing to put American
[5:37] Speaker 3: assets out there without returns.
[5:42] Speaker 2: You know, I want to ask you something.
[5:43] Speaker 1: You know, a lot of the reading that I've been
[5:44] Speaker 1: doing in the rerea up to this episode and just
[5:46] Speaker 1: on the Russia Ukraine ward generally, and on America's relationship
[5:50] Speaker 1: with Russia. Is this relationship between Trump and put In?
[5:53] Speaker 1: There has been some speculation that, of course, you know,
[5:56] Speaker 1: any foreign policy team has its divisions, has its disagreements
[5:59] Speaker 1: Trump aspect, people who are strong hawks on Russia, people
[6:03] Speaker 1: who want to put pressure like Marco Rubio who's the
[6:04] Speaker 1: Secretary of State, as well as Michael Watz, who's the
[6:09] Speaker 1: National Security Advisors. These are people who are strong Russia hawks.
[6:12] Speaker 1: They want to put pressure on Russia. But Trump himself
[6:14] Speaker 1: seems to have a very different policy, seems to have
[6:17] Speaker 1: some real affection or respect for Vladimir put In, Russia's president.
[6:20] Speaker 1: Where is this coming from. It seems to be producing
[6:23] Speaker 1: a policy that you haven't seen very much. You haven't
[6:26] Speaker 1: seen very much criticism of Russia at all. But you know,
[6:28] Speaker 1: Trump has gone out and called Zelenski a dictator. So
[6:30] Speaker 1: you see that Russia has been treated extremely reasonably in
[6:34] Speaker 1: the last couple of weeks and months, but Europe and
[6:36] Speaker 1: Ukraine have really faced the hammer.
[6:38] Speaker 2: What's happening here?
[6:39] Speaker 3: That's because you pull out the strategic map, you said,
[6:41] Speaker 3: Marco Rubio and Waltz they're actually bigger hawks when it
[6:45] Speaker 3: comes to China. They're absolutely anti China. So when you
[6:49] Speaker 3: have to decide where do you want to focus your energies,
[6:53] Speaker 3: and should you focus your energies on fighting Russia, then
[6:57] Speaker 3: you're getting Russia to go closer to China. In fact,
[7:01] Speaker 3: if anything, Trump has been quite away from what his
[7:06] Speaker 3: promises were on China as well. To our question Global
[7:12] Speaker 3: India today, Global I was there and I asked him,
[7:15] Speaker 3: if you want to defeat China, why are you being
[7:17] Speaker 3: so tough on India? And he said, no, we don't
[7:19] Speaker 3: want to There is no competition here. We want to
[7:23] Speaker 3: work with everybody. And that's a massive shift. And you
[7:27] Speaker 3: have Marco Rubio involved in the same room. You're who
[7:30] Speaker 3: want to fight China, right, but then you choose your enemies,
[7:33] Speaker 3: and I think over here the strategy is that it
[7:36] Speaker 3: does not bode well for America and American interest to
[7:39] Speaker 3: be fighting Russia when in terms of everything that Trump
[7:43] Speaker 3: is about, which is trade and money and economics, the
[7:46] Speaker 3: one country they should be looking at is China.
[7:49] Speaker 1: Right to ask you that question, because this is exactly
[7:51] Speaker 1: the big question, I think you've hit the nail on
[7:52] Speaker 1: the head, which is the big question that's coming out.
[7:55] Speaker 1: The best analysis that I've seen is that, look, the
[7:57] Speaker 1: reason why Trump is being so friendly towards put In,
[7:59] Speaker 1: the reason why he's willing to even push aside his
[8:02] Speaker 1: own European and allies as well as Ukraine, is that
[8:05] Speaker 1: he understands that if the big competition is with China,
[8:08] Speaker 1: if China is the country that can do real damage,
[8:10] Speaker 1: generally threaten your interests, then what you want to do
[8:12] Speaker 1: is drive a wedge between those countries. You want China
[8:15] Speaker 1: and Russia, which have extremely close for the last couple
[8:17] Speaker 1: of years, you want to drive a wedge between them.
[8:19] Speaker 1: You want to split them in some way, like Henry
[8:21] Speaker 1: Kissinger perhaps says that hold Henry Kissinger argument that's used
[8:24] Speaker 1: in nineteen seventy one during the Cold War, he went
[8:26] Speaker 1: and split China and Russia.
[8:28] Speaker 3: All through the Biden administration, Kissinger kept saying, he kept reiterating,
[8:33] Speaker 3: so much pressure, this is not the strategy. Why are
[8:35] Speaker 3: you supporting a war? Why did you push? And he
[8:39] Speaker 3: in fact actually said why are you pushing? You pushed
[8:41] Speaker 3: Ukraine into this war. It's not the other war.
[8:44] Speaker 1: So could ask you then a follow up question, there
[8:46] Speaker 1: are that is a strategy that look, if we make
[8:49] Speaker 1: peace with Russia and we act friendly towards them and
[8:51] Speaker 1: give them a decent deal, they will feel less need
[8:53] Speaker 1: to cooperate at China. China will have fewer friends and
[8:55] Speaker 1: allies around the world, and they will then be more
[8:57] Speaker 1: amenable to American pressure Becauseussia is really China strongest ally
[9:01] Speaker 1: in the world.
[9:02] Speaker 3: Right now, I'd say that you're put in this part
[9:04] Speaker 3: than that.
[9:05] Speaker 1: So the question I have this is exactly the question
[9:07] Speaker 1: that a lot of critics of Trump are raising at
[9:09] Speaker 1: this point. They're saying that, look, you are willing to
[9:11] Speaker 1: sideline your European allies as well as put Ukraine on
[9:14] Speaker 1: the table and give the Russians what they want because
[9:16] Speaker 1: you want to engineer some sort of.
[9:17] Speaker 2: Divide between Russia and China.
[9:19] Speaker 1: But the relationship between those two countries is extremely strong.
[9:22] Speaker 1: China supplies around eighty to ninety percent of the computer
[9:25] Speaker 1: chips that Russia needs to run its economy. China buys
[9:29] Speaker 1: Russian oil and gas. There's a strong defense relationship between
[9:32] Speaker 1: those two countries. There's a shared worldview. They're both suspicious
[9:34] Speaker 1: of US dominance. Even if you give Russia what it
[9:37] Speaker 1: wants on Ukraine can you really engineer the kind of
[9:39] Speaker 1: split that you want and leave China more alone, more isolated,
[9:43] Speaker 1: so it will be more amenable toy or pressure. Can
[9:44] Speaker 1: you really engineer a split.
[9:46] Speaker 2: In these two countries?
[9:47] Speaker 3: I really don't think so.
[9:48] Speaker 2: And do you think that is a strategy? Do you
[9:49] Speaker 2: think it's different?
[9:50] Speaker 3: I don't think that's a strategy. That's how it's right,
[9:52] Speaker 3: because realistically speaking in if they're pragmatic enough and if
[9:56] Speaker 3: they have a strong China and strong Russia hands in
[10:02] Speaker 3: their couterie, which right now I think they kind of do.
[10:06] Speaker 3: I don't think realistically they can drive a wedge. There
[10:10] Speaker 3: is no splitting. There's only how can you use Uh
[10:16] Speaker 3: would America want Russia or China to use a China
[10:21] Speaker 3: card or a Russia card against American interests? Now a
[10:24] Speaker 3: larger picture for Russia? What is more important in terms
[10:28] Speaker 3: of interests? Looking at China and whether this China is
[10:31] Speaker 3: served well by America or looking at ending this war Shashang,
[10:36] Speaker 3: there are bodies coming home. People don't realize They think
[10:40] Speaker 3: that you know, Russia has gained, but Russia is gaining
[10:43] Speaker 3: at a cost. The cost is so high that right
[10:46] Speaker 3: now Putin cannot withdraw if putin withdraws. Then Russians will
[10:53] Speaker 3: be up and arms saying why did I lose my son? Pray,
[10:56] Speaker 3: tell why have I lost my child to a war
[11:02] Speaker 3: that you were not even willing to hold?
[11:04] Speaker 2: What was it all for? What does it sacrifice all?
[11:06] Speaker 3: You're not willing to hold that land? So there is
[11:09] Speaker 3: there are non negotiables Donbass region on Russian territory after
[11:14] Speaker 3: the referendum non negotiable. In fact, I'd go on to
[11:18] Speaker 3: say that everything beyond the Daneper River, east of the
[11:22] Speaker 3: Daneper River, Daneper River could become the natural boundary between
[11:27] Speaker 3: Ukraine and Russia with Zapparagia. If you pull up the map,
[11:31] Speaker 3: Zapparagia on the eastern front of the plank of Deneper
[11:36] Speaker 3: has the power plant. He's not going to let go
[11:38] Speaker 3: of the power plant anymore. So he actually thought Gorbachev
[11:42] Speaker 3: made a mistake. You don't give nuclear power plants, right,
[11:46] Speaker 3: So I don't think that's the case. And again larger
[11:49] Speaker 3: picture here, the Chinese understand this too, and very well.
[11:54] Speaker 3: They know that. You know, the Russians or Americans are
[11:57] Speaker 3: not going to do anything that is going to be
[11:58] Speaker 3: her that would her their own interests and China also
[12:02] Speaker 3: does business with everyone. They're providing to everyone, so including India.
[12:08] Speaker 3: In fact, we talk about Taiwan, the most business that
[12:15] Speaker 3: is done between Taiwan is with mainland China. They do
[12:19] Speaker 3: business with every So their business interests do not align
[12:23] Speaker 3: with their strategic and geopolitical It furthers their geopolitical and
[12:30] Speaker 3: strategic interest but it does not always align in the sense,
[12:32] Speaker 3: if I'm warring with India at the border, I will
[12:35] Speaker 3: not stop selling to India.
[12:38] Speaker 2: So ask you this question.
[12:39] Speaker 1: Then, so you're saying that the view in the tromp
[12:43] Speaker 1: aremministration is not necessarily that we can split Russia from China.
[12:46] Speaker 1: The view is that we can manage the level of
[12:48] Speaker 1: hostility from the Russians in a way that's such that
[12:51] Speaker 1: we do not have to be so engaged in the
[12:52] Speaker 1: Ukraine war and focus on other priorities, saying that's the way.
[12:55] Speaker 3: Yes, but also a very strong view that I don't
[12:58] Speaker 3: want to spend my bucks on this perfect sen so
[13:01] Speaker 3: primarily that all this comes later. The primary thing for
[13:05] Speaker 3: Donald Trump has been that he's not taken his country
[13:08] Speaker 3: to war in the first in his first term. He
[13:11] Speaker 3: has no interest in what he calls wasting the American
[13:16] Speaker 3: dollar on anything that is that does not serve his interests.
[13:21] Speaker 3: Look at what he's done to USA, and these are
[13:23] Speaker 3: smaller matters with Russia Ukraine. He's very clear why, because
[13:28] Speaker 3: the war was not. This idea of I'm not going
[13:31] Speaker 3: to support Ukraine is not because he does not like Ukraine.
[13:35] Speaker 3: It's because he does not like the idea of NATO
[13:40] Speaker 3: and how much US spends NATO. Right that he's always
[13:44] Speaker 3: had a problem with that.
[13:44] Speaker 1: Right, So the money spending that the America America is doing,
[13:47] Speaker 1: that makes US spend dollars. So you're saying that the
[13:50] Speaker 1: number one strategic priority for Trump is I don't want
[13:52] Speaker 1: to spend as much money as I am currently in
[13:54] Speaker 1: fighting this conflict, and the secretary things, of course, will
[13:56] Speaker 1: be any conflict broader issues of farm Polcian strategy. So
[13:59] Speaker 1: this is this is what America gets. If I gotta
[14:02] Speaker 1: ask you in terms of how you're seeing how Ukraine
[14:06] Speaker 1: and Europe are looking at this right because the view
[14:08] Speaker 1: broadly is that they're getting shafted by Trump. You can
[14:11] Speaker 1: see this sort of indignation, a lot of outrage among
[14:13] Speaker 1: European even some American strategic thinkers about how Trump is
[14:16] Speaker 1: treating them. Ukraine in particular. You know, Trump called Zelenska
[14:19] Speaker 1: a dictator. He's demanded vast quantities of American of Ukrainian
[14:24] Speaker 1: natural resources and.
[14:25] Speaker 3: Asked him to step down.
[14:26] Speaker 2: He's actually gone.
[14:29] Speaker 3: Larity, which is not correct, right, but he's hinted that.
[14:31] Speaker 1: So so my question is, how are you thinking about
[14:34] Speaker 1: where Ukraine and Europe are right now? This must be
[14:37] Speaker 1: quite a shock if you're sitting in any European capital
[14:39] Speaker 1: at this point in time.
[14:42] Speaker 3: See I see that. It's it's just so fascinating how
[14:46] Speaker 3: things are changing in Europe. You have the far right
[14:49] Speaker 3: coming together, you have Maloney saying that you know, Trump,
[14:52] Speaker 3: Mila Meloney and Maloney and even more the coming together.
[14:59] Speaker 3: You know, this is is killing democracy, is a threat
[15:03] Speaker 3: to democracy. But then speaks of double standards by the
[15:07] Speaker 3: by the international community. But on the other hand, she
[15:09] Speaker 3: did go and meet Macra. She did. There are meetings
[15:13] Speaker 3: that are happening. European world is conflicted and concerned.
[15:16] Speaker 2: About actually hasn't. Maloney has been stronger and put.
[15:22] Speaker 3: But she's also every every far right leader in Europe
[15:27] Speaker 3: right now is balancing. And now you've seen Germany change,
[15:31] Speaker 3: So we'll see how they balance this entire equation. Nobody
[15:35] Speaker 3: wants to be in this war. I've seen it, Sheshank
[15:38] Speaker 3: when they said that will Ukraine joined NATO, and we
[15:42] Speaker 3: were there when the war was happening, and when Ukraine
[15:46] Speaker 3: was being bombarded, and people who are coming out of
[15:49] Speaker 3: the Bucha side of the territory into Kiev, quite a
[15:56] Speaker 3: few of them are like, where is NATO? And they
[15:58] Speaker 3: have a billboard billboards where people were writing where is NATO.
[16:03] Speaker 3: So somewhere around the line, people were betrayed because you
[16:10] Speaker 3: don't go ahead as a leader and say, oh, we're
[16:12] Speaker 3: joining the NATO. We're joining the NATO, and not join
[16:15] Speaker 3: the NATO.
[16:15] Speaker 2: Right. Ask your question.
[16:16] Speaker 1: This is a very key point that you made, and
[16:17] Speaker 1: I wanted to draw on your experience because some of
[16:19] Speaker 1: you may know that Ghita was actually in Ukraine, she
[16:23] Speaker 1: was also in Russia.
[16:24] Speaker 2: You reported from that.
[16:25] Speaker 1: Do you see this Do you think that the Europeans
[16:27] Speaker 1: and Ukraine and the Ukrainian people will be right to
[16:29] Speaker 1: see this as a betrayal because they certainly it seems
[16:34] Speaker 1: from some of the reporting that we're saying, they seem
[16:35] Speaker 1: to think that it is.
[16:36] Speaker 2: Do you think it's a bitrial.
[16:37] Speaker 3: See so his popularity rate. Zelenski's popularity rating has not
[16:42] Speaker 3: gone down to four percent.
[16:43] Speaker 2: But it has certainly gone It has gone down here.
[16:45] Speaker 3: It has gone down for a few reasons. One is
[16:47] Speaker 3: that frustrated every opposition leader became an anti national because
[16:53] Speaker 3: they were Ukraine has the history has had a history
[16:57] Speaker 3: of pro Ukraine, pro Russia governments and pro West governments.
[17:01] Speaker 3: Right now, during war, everybody rallies behind the leader who
[17:06] Speaker 3: is there in that position at that point in time,
[17:09] Speaker 3: so he becomes a war hero. Then fatigue sets in
[17:12] Speaker 3: and people start questioning was this the right thing to do,
[17:15] Speaker 3: because now everybody's asking maybe we were never ever to
[17:20] Speaker 3: join NATO. In fact, after two years, one and a
[17:22] Speaker 3: half years of struggle, Zelenski came out and said, well,
[17:25] Speaker 3: let me tell you this, we are not joining NATO.
[17:27] Speaker 3: We will never be a part of NATO because you know,
[17:29] Speaker 3: they're not allowing us or whatever entry. But they didn't
[17:32] Speaker 3: meet the criterion. One of the most criteria, one of
[17:35] Speaker 3: the most important criterion to be a part of NATO
[17:39] Speaker 3: is peace and stability. Forget about the fact that corruption, democracy,
[17:44] Speaker 3: freedom of speech, all of that also does not exist
[17:46] Speaker 3: in Ukraine. Okay, it's not a full democracy, so to
[17:49] Speaker 3: say freedom of speech is curtailed. He in fact shut
[17:52] Speaker 3: down media houses that were speaking against him. He banned
[17:56] Speaker 3: Russian as an official language in eastern parts of Ukraine.
[17:59] Speaker 3: For an Indian, we understand the importance of language and
[18:01] Speaker 3: if it's banned or if another language is imposed. For
[18:04] Speaker 3: a South Indian, I understand it a lot more because
[18:07] Speaker 3: you know, down south they've had that thing of imposition.
[18:11] Speaker 3: Right of Indian, I'm allowed waking up and saying we're
[18:15] Speaker 3: not going to So when you have Russian speaking people
[18:18] Speaker 3: saying that, but we are Ukrainian, why do you have
[18:21] Speaker 3: to ban a language? Why do you need to do that.
[18:24] Speaker 3: We're Ukrainian, but we speak Russian, we have Russian origin,
[18:28] Speaker 3: we have Russian roots, familiar tis marital ties so much
[18:32] Speaker 3: and so you know so much. So they were never
[18:35] Speaker 3: going to join NATO because there's no peace and stability,
[18:38] Speaker 3: forget everything else. Zelenski should have known that and no
[18:44] Speaker 3: NATO country, And which is why I will come back
[18:47] Speaker 3: to your Europe question. You know, when you're there, you
[18:50] Speaker 3: know that forget about NATO. Even you did not include
[18:53] Speaker 3: they fast tracked the entire application. What happened they fast
[18:57] Speaker 3: tracked one and a half years ago, right, what happened? Are?
[19:02] Speaker 3: Where are they shishank is? Is Ukraine a part of EU?
[19:06] Speaker 3: I mean the European Union should be answering this. What
[19:09] Speaker 3: was that fast track? Where is the application? What's the process?
[19:14] Speaker 3: So instead of outraging Europe should realize that they have
[19:18] Speaker 3: not done what they They've not held up their side.
[19:22] Speaker 1: So basically, how do you think India is going to
[19:24] Speaker 1: be reacting to these talks between Russia and the United States?
[19:27] Speaker 1: What is india interestidency happen? You know, India has always
[19:30] Speaker 1: said that, look, we want to negotiated end to this conflict.
[19:33] Speaker 1: So do you think these talks, regardless of whatever Europe
[19:36] Speaker 1: is saying or whatever Ukraine is saying, do you think
[19:38] Speaker 1: the very fact that Russia US stocks is good news
[19:40] Speaker 1: for India and perhaps finding.
[19:42] Speaker 3: The world's it's good news, It's not bad news. In fact,
[19:47] Speaker 3: Russia America had bilaterals with Russia and with Ukraine, and
[19:52] Speaker 3: they did not have a bilateral press conference when they
[19:55] Speaker 3: spoke with Ukraine, because that's the kind of problems that
[20:00] Speaker 3: the two countries haven't agreeing to things. Right, with Russia,
[20:03] Speaker 3: there was an absolute agreement with Ukraine. There is okay,
[20:06] Speaker 3: if you want my money and if you want my weapons,
[20:09] Speaker 3: then pay up in terms of resources that you have.
[20:14] Speaker 3: And Zelenski actually had a map where he was looking
[20:16] Speaker 3: at the resources. I'm sorry, it's not funny, you know,
[20:20] Speaker 3: I just chuckled, but it's not funny. It's a very
[20:23] Speaker 3: serious matter to to shank. But it's also very sad
[20:26] Speaker 3: because realistically speaking again, you know, I missed out on
[20:29] Speaker 3: that point when I was talking about the opposition leaders.
[20:32] Speaker 3: Now the opposition leaders within Ukraine workurtailed, they were put
[20:36] Speaker 3: in prison. All that has happened in Ukraine. Now Zelensky's
[20:41] Speaker 3: being questioned because should there be elections and should a
[20:45] Speaker 3: pro Russia party come to power? Given that, people people's
[20:49] Speaker 3: sense what's happening. People are seeing that now Putin has
[20:52] Speaker 3: an upper hand with America not supporting Zelensky. If a
[20:56] Speaker 3: pro Russia government comes to power, then what will happen?
[21:01] Speaker 3: This is a fall of a war hero.
[21:03] Speaker 1: Then you're right, but he has, as I understand it,
[21:06] Speaker 1: agreed to also step down if if Ukraine.
[21:11] Speaker 3: Because then he if he steps down, he will not
[21:15] Speaker 3: be able to stay in Ukraine.
[21:16] Speaker 1: So just a second, so do you agree with Trump's
[21:18] Speaker 1: characterization of Zelensky as a dictator. You've been on the ground,
[21:21] Speaker 1: what do you sense? Or is it just a flawed democracy?
[21:24] Speaker 1: Has a lot of think tanks like to call it.
[21:27] Speaker 3: It is a flawed democracy, but also failing state. Uh,
[21:36] Speaker 3: it's it's it's a fair I'd not say, I will
[21:39] Speaker 3: not call Zelensky a dictator per se, but my way
[21:45] Speaker 3: or the highway is dictatorial, right, And when you start
[21:49] Speaker 3: doing that, democracy starts failing. So is he a dictator?
[21:54] Speaker 3: To be a dictator, you have to be completely in control.
[21:57] Speaker 3: I don't think Zelenski is completely in control. That's why
[22:00] Speaker 3: I can't call him a dictator. But is he part
[22:03] Speaker 3: of a system where the system is failing? I think
[22:08] Speaker 3: that's but again, it's a country at war. There's only
[22:11] Speaker 3: that much that you can do with their reports of
[22:13] Speaker 3: corruption within the AID. And this is not Trump saying, oh,
[22:18] Speaker 3: where's the money, missing money? No, we're talking about serious
[22:21] Speaker 3: reports that have come out about you know, money that
[22:24] Speaker 3: went for aid and weapons and some of it went missing.
[22:27] Speaker 3: And I'm not saying all of it, some of it, right,
[22:30] Speaker 3: So there is a lot of problem within Ukraine. They
[22:34] Speaker 3: will have to deal with it and for India. India's
[22:39] Speaker 3: position was very clear that they we have historical ties
[22:43] Speaker 3: with Ukraine as well. A lot of people think, oh, dependence.
[22:46] Speaker 3: You know, we have historical ties with Russia. Look at
[22:49] Speaker 3: how many students go and study in Ukraine. Ukraine was
[22:52] Speaker 3: not providing weapons systems to us, but we still had
[22:57] Speaker 3: historical ties, as we do with most of the Soviet state,
[23:00] Speaker 3: and over here there was dependence. There was dependence to
[23:04] Speaker 3: the extent that Russia is not just a partner where
[23:07] Speaker 3: we take a lot of weapons and changing their weapons
[23:10] Speaker 3: systems is going to be difficult. It's a partnership of trust.
[23:15] Speaker 3: A country that has stood by India through thick and thin.
[23:19] Speaker 3: Is America a reliable partner? Well, you know the entire
[23:23] Speaker 3: there's a reset every time there's a change. Not every time,
[23:27] Speaker 3: but in the past few administrations there have a.
[23:29] Speaker 1: Lot of people are going to look at this and
[23:31] Speaker 1: say that, look, wasn't India's negotiating position or its position
[23:33] Speaker 1: on the Ukraine War perfectly correct? Since twenty twenty two,
[23:36] Speaker 1: A lot they'll go to a lot of European countries
[23:38] Speaker 1: and say, look, you guys put everything you had into this,
[23:42] Speaker 1: gave billions and tens of billions of dollars back to
[23:44] Speaker 1: the Americans, trusted the Americans to deliver totally for you,
[23:47] Speaker 1: and now you're left, you know, out in the cold
[23:50] Speaker 1: where while the Americans and the Russians are out discussing
[23:53] Speaker 1: the fate of Ukraine as well as the future of
[23:56] Speaker 1: European security, and you guys are completely sidelined in India. Yeah,
[23:59] Speaker 1: India's got to look at a lot of European countries.
[24:01] Speaker 1: In a European country, we can do this again. Yeah,
[24:04] Speaker 1: so this allows me a chance to get into something
[24:07] Speaker 1: I wanted to ask you, which is that does this
[24:10] Speaker 1: does the do the events of the last few weeks
[24:11] Speaker 1: validate therefore India's entire position on how it approached the
[24:15] Speaker 1: Ukraine War, which is to say that, look, we chose
[24:19] Speaker 1: to say that we want a negotiated solution.
[24:21] Speaker 2: This is not an era of war.
[24:23] Speaker 1: We don't want to pick a side in this conflict because,
[24:25] Speaker 1: to be frank, what happens in Ukraine, while important, is
[24:29] Speaker 1: not necessarily critical to our strategic intus. We cannot give
[24:31] Speaker 1: up our relationship with Russia. We cannot give up our
[24:34] Speaker 1: relationship Western countries as well. So we will we are
[24:36] Speaker 1: prepared to be helpful, but we do not wish to
[24:39] Speaker 1: take aside and I'll.
[24:40] Speaker 3: Just change the country to your exact sentence. And so
[24:44] Speaker 3: saying what happens in Ukraine is not critical to or
[24:49] Speaker 3: does not have foreign policy implications. Instead that I'd say,
[24:53] Speaker 3: what happens in America should not have massive critical implication
[25:00] Speaker 3: on India's foreign policy because India looks at its foreign
[25:04] Speaker 3: policy through the prism of strategic autonomy. So why should
[25:09] Speaker 3: we always question, oh, now that Trump is there, should
[25:12] Speaker 3: we be happy now that Trump is there? Is this
[25:15] Speaker 3: a better place for India? India was not very badly
[25:18] Speaker 3: placed even with Biden, sheshank because we managed to stand
[25:23] Speaker 3: our ground was our method. The only thing is that
[25:29] Speaker 3: there was a lot of criticism and not how we
[25:31] Speaker 3: positioned ourselves because everybody needed India. So everybody then what
[25:36] Speaker 3: did they start saying. They start saying for every other
[25:38] Speaker 3: country they'd be critical, but for India they'd say, we understand,
[25:42] Speaker 3: we understand why India needs it, right, so they were
[25:45] Speaker 3: understanding of India. After work, there was criticism of how
[25:49] Speaker 3: Jshankur maybe used harsh words sitting with the European leader.
[25:54] Speaker 3: Using harsh words, maybe that takes anal of First Minister's
[25:57] Speaker 3: words hurt them more than the fact that the position
[26:01] Speaker 3: was taken right.
[26:01] Speaker 2: But if I could ask you, then the point I'm
[26:03] Speaker 2: trying to ask, but this.
[26:04] Speaker 3: Is just me playing there is advocate. I do think
[26:07] Speaker 3: that what America does says.
[26:09] Speaker 1: The question I wanted to ask for broadly was that
[26:11] Speaker 1: what if so India took a fairly balanced position on
[26:14] Speaker 1: the conference and that we have too many interests on
[26:17] Speaker 1: both sides, We're not getting involved in this. They can
[26:20] Speaker 1: now look to the Europeans. Andy said that, look, you
[26:21] Speaker 1: pushed us to take a side on this conflict. What
[26:24] Speaker 1: would have happened If we had come down on your side?
[26:25] Speaker 1: We would have backed you the West, Europe and America,
[26:29] Speaker 1: and we would have found us US in the exact
[26:30] Speaker 1: same position as you. We would have relationship, We would
[26:33] Speaker 1: have sacrificed our relationship with Russia. And now the Americans
[26:36] Speaker 1: have turned on you. You are completely sidelined. What would
[26:38] Speaker 1: have they would that have left us? So US saying
[26:40] Speaker 1: that we have too many equities on both sides, We're
[26:42] Speaker 1: going to stay out of this was sober rational and
[26:44] Speaker 1: ultimately the correct policy. Whereas Europe is left sidelined by
[26:48] Speaker 1: its own ally, which is in some sense very betrayed
[26:50] Speaker 1: by its own ally.
[26:51] Speaker 3: They knew, but they knew that, we knew that.
[26:54] Speaker 1: But if your argument is correct that India therefore picked
[26:56] Speaker 1: the right side with hindsight, picked the right policy on
[26:59] Speaker 1: the Ukraine War, that's the correct view.
[27:01] Speaker 3: Yeah, but it was not very balance, and they was
[27:04] Speaker 3: not trying to be balanced, and they was looking at
[27:05] Speaker 3: its strategic interests, and its interests lay in having Russia
[27:10] Speaker 3: as a partner. In fact, we made we did good
[27:16] Speaker 3: on the oil front as well, because Iran had shut
[27:19] Speaker 3: down for US completely, and so this really worked out
[27:23] Speaker 3: because you had oil coming in from Russia rather than
[27:27] Speaker 3: now what you're going to do with Trump and the
[27:30] Speaker 3: energy security so called and buying American oil, which we'll
[27:34] Speaker 3: have to see how much it'll cost us, you know,
[27:36] Speaker 3: you know.
[27:37] Speaker 1: So then I was going to ask you one more
[27:40] Speaker 1: question on this broad question that always comes up now
[27:43] Speaker 1: that is coming up about American reliability. The view is
[27:46] Speaker 1: that now everyone in the world is looking at the
[27:47] Speaker 1: Robits and saying, look, this is what happens when you
[27:49] Speaker 1: become too reliant on the Americans. You rely them to
[27:52] Speaker 1: fight your wars, you rely on them for your entire security.
[27:54] Speaker 1: And now you are left out in the cold. When
[27:57] Speaker 1: the end of the largest land one in Europe since
[27:59] Speaker 1: the Second World War is being decided, you left out
[28:01] Speaker 1: of the cold. This is what happens when you trust
[28:02] Speaker 1: the Americans too much, You get shafted. Do you think
[28:05] Speaker 1: that do you think there is a lesson for India
[28:07] Speaker 1: here as well?
[28:07] Speaker 3: That Americans in India learned this lesson long long ago.
[28:13] Speaker 3: I think there was a shift that was happening towards America,
[28:19] Speaker 3: the anti Nehruvian you know shift saying that this whole
[28:24] Speaker 3: non non alignment, and then you see what India is doing.
[28:29] Speaker 3: It came back to what is Nehruvian, very Neruvian in
[28:34] Speaker 3: its foreign policy. Choosing the path which where you where
[28:38] Speaker 3: you're not taking sides, you're looking at your own interests,
[28:41] Speaker 3: and you're looking at a world where India is not
[28:46] Speaker 3: a superpower right now. We intend to become, and if
[28:50] Speaker 3: you intend to become, you can't have superpowers as your
[28:53] Speaker 3: rivals or your enemy is certainly not. So you're you're
[28:56] Speaker 3: choosing a charting a path for yourself where you say, okay,
[28:59] Speaker 3: the right now is between China and uh and America
[29:03] Speaker 3: so we'll find our way to make our space. And
[29:07] Speaker 3: we've already made enough space and enough noise to hold
[29:12] Speaker 3: our own in many conversations and have become key players
[29:16] Speaker 3: in some. So we are we're there, but we're not
[29:20] Speaker 3: there in terms of the war.
[29:22] Speaker 1: I think.
[29:22] Speaker 3: So we've we've done well for ourselves in terms of
[29:24] Speaker 3: reliability and America, India learned its lessons long ago. But
[29:30] Speaker 3: with Europe it's new. It's not about America not being reliable.
[29:34] Speaker 3: America was never unreliable. This is the first time that
[29:40] Speaker 3: they're seeing a geopolitical shift where America's foreign policy has changed.
[29:46] Speaker 3: Never ever, ever have they have they had these questions
[29:51] Speaker 3: of whether it will America come to us? Never, So
[29:56] Speaker 3: this is this is not a learning for us. It
[29:59] Speaker 3: certainly is not a learning as such for Europe as well, Shushank,
[30:03] Speaker 3: because at the end of the day, their interests to align.
[30:07] Speaker 3: So it is a phase, interesting, a four year phase,
[30:12] Speaker 3: and then we'll see a reset again. No matter who
[30:15] Speaker 3: comes to part Republicans are Democrats.
[30:17] Speaker 1: But then if I can ask you this, right, a
[30:19] Speaker 1: lot of countries around the world are going to look
[30:20] Speaker 1: at the United States and say that, look, this is
[30:22] Speaker 1: a country like for example, India has had a fairly
[30:25] Speaker 1: stable foreign policy. Even when it evolves, it evolves in
[30:27] Speaker 1: a gradual sense, and the view for a lot of
[30:29] Speaker 1: countries is going to be that Look this is look
[30:31] Speaker 1: at Ukraine. The Americans when Kung Ho into Ukraine were
[30:34] Speaker 1: providing tens of billions of dollars worth of aid, military
[30:37] Speaker 1: Supplieswan the Dondrum comes in and on, you know, and
[30:40] Speaker 1: the policies is completely those same allies are shafted right.
[30:43] Speaker 3: Right, quiet, you can complete your question. But America also
[30:47] Speaker 3: did wrong by Ukraine because you know, you think that
[30:50] Speaker 3: this sent a lot, but everything was delayed. We were
[30:53] Speaker 3: there and Ukrainians were waiting for weapons to come in time.
[30:58] Speaker 3: They lost territory, not big because they couldn't fight a
[31:02] Speaker 3: war with Russia. They lost territory because their allies didn't
[31:06] Speaker 3: support them when you create required them to the time.
[31:12] Speaker 3: Time is of the essence during war and over here
[31:16] Speaker 3: they just did not provide them enough.
[31:19] Speaker 2: So this is much of the European critics.
[31:20] Speaker 3: I can go ahead with you.
[31:21] Speaker 2: So you're echoing the European.
[31:22] Speaker 1: Critique, which is that Biden did not provide enough, and
[31:26] Speaker 1: India don't agree with that. They believe that, look, if
[31:28] Speaker 1: this is more than enough. You went to you provided intelligence,
[31:31] Speaker 1: saying that you could whatly do with intelligence without But
[31:34] Speaker 1: you called out to the Russians early know for example,
[31:36] Speaker 1: very prominent scholars in India have pointed out that, look,
[31:39] Speaker 1: you pointed out very early on that the Russians are
[31:41] Speaker 1: going to war. You backed them into a corner and
[31:43] Speaker 1: basically internationally called them out, and then they had to
[31:45] Speaker 1: go to wars. So you boxed them into a position.
[31:48] Speaker 1: So viewers that the bidenstation in fact provoked it absolutely
[31:51] Speaker 1: have been responsible for it may also have to support
[31:54] Speaker 1: or no.
[31:55] Speaker 3: Because also they kept saying, and Zelenski also kept saying,
[31:57] Speaker 3: because he bought into that entire a thing of joining NATO.
[32:02] Speaker 3: They kept saying, Oh, we're going to Ukraine is going
[32:04] Speaker 3: to become part of NATO, and Ukraine kept Zelenski kept saying, oh,
[32:07] Speaker 3: we're going to become part of NATO, and Putin kept saying,
[32:10] Speaker 3: do not because this is expansionism. NATO was built as
[32:13] Speaker 3: an anti Soviet alliance. Why are you expanding? The whole
[32:16] Speaker 3: understanding was that NATO will not expand why are you expanding?
[32:21] Speaker 3: You've had so many countries joining America keeps saying that, no,
[32:24] Speaker 3: there has been no expansionism. There are certain countries who
[32:27] Speaker 3: wanted to join because they felt threatened by Russia. I
[32:31] Speaker 3: don't think that's particularly the case over here, because I
[32:34] Speaker 3: don't think Russia wanted to invade.
[32:37] Speaker 1: Then let me, let's close off them with this question
[32:39] Speaker 1: that I was trying to finish off with, which is
[32:41] Speaker 1: the question that a lot of people are asking around
[32:44] Speaker 1: the world, which is that look is this the is
[32:48] Speaker 1: this for example, if you're sitting in Taiwan, if you're
[32:50] Speaker 1: sitting in Tokyo, if you're sitting in South Korea, even
[32:53] Speaker 1: if you're sitting in Deli, the view is, look, can
[32:55] Speaker 1: American policy switch on a dime and leave you and
[32:58] Speaker 1: your friends undefended? Because in many countries Japan, South Korea,
[33:02] Speaker 1: and Taiwan, for example, they are critically dependent on America
[33:04] Speaker 1: for their security. How are they going to look at
[33:06] Speaker 1: what's happening in Ukrain Will they be worried? Do you
[33:08] Speaker 1: think it has any lessons for India as well? Or
[33:10] Speaker 1: do you think that, Look, India's partnership is very different.
[33:12] Speaker 1: It's based on interest on China.
[33:14] Speaker 2: We should we do not need to be as worried
[33:17] Speaker 2: as we should be.
[33:18] Speaker 3: We should be very concerned. We should be concerned not
[33:21] Speaker 3: because you know whether the US will support India in
[33:25] Speaker 3: any war, because India is not reliant on US for
[33:28] Speaker 3: to fight any war, really not reliant and that makes
[33:34] Speaker 3: sense now.
[33:35] Speaker 2: So India is a separate case. But in other countries,
[33:37] Speaker 2: but we have to.
[33:38] Speaker 3: Be concerned about how the trade wars could impact India's growth.
[33:44] Speaker 3: If he's going to push for making America rather than
[33:47] Speaker 3: make in India, then where are we at. If he's
[33:50] Speaker 3: going to push for tariffs and reciprocal tariffs, where are
[33:53] Speaker 3: we at? We have already made some concessions in our
[33:56] Speaker 3: budget and post budget as well, So where are we at?
[33:59] Speaker 3: It's to be concerning four months. Uh, they're going to
[34:03] Speaker 3: be ups and downs. But for the other countries, I
[34:07] Speaker 3: think they have a major rething to do because these
[34:11] Speaker 3: four years are going to change how how Europe will
[34:16] Speaker 3: look and how Europe sees the entire, the entire geopolitics
[34:22] Speaker 3: and the landscape changing. Also, coming to your point on
[34:27] Speaker 3: on South Korea, Trump one point. Oh, they were looking
[34:34] Speaker 3: at the meeting with North Korea with so much concern,
[34:39] Speaker 3: but also maybe some sort of some sort of hope
[34:44] Speaker 3: that maybe he will bring about this could lead to
[34:49] Speaker 3: talks and and lowering of tempers that didn't happen. But
[34:55] Speaker 3: there are but the larger picture, you know, when it
[34:57] Speaker 3: comes to Trump, and we know we're not saying that,
[35:00] Speaker 3: you know, he's he's acting in a way that we
[35:04] Speaker 3: don't know what's going to happen tomorrow. He talks about Greenland,
[35:07] Speaker 3: Gulf of Mexico, today's Gulf of America. Google is changed
[35:10] Speaker 3: in him, the Gulf of America. He's pushing everybody, he's pushing, pushing,
[35:15] Speaker 3: pushing the buttons over here. But one thing, one button
[35:18] Speaker 3: he's not pushing, is the button of war. He does
[35:23] Speaker 3: not want war. Could he land you know, a nobel
[35:28] Speaker 3: peace price? We don't really know. But he's not pushing
[35:31] Speaker 3: the war button. And if he's not pushing the war button,
[35:34] Speaker 3: I think the only place where he could be rather
[35:37] Speaker 3: aggressive is Israel Palestine, because Israel is very, very you know,
[35:44] Speaker 3: there's so much of dichotomy. Then you have the American
[35:47] Speaker 3: representative in the meetings, the Native meetings, where he said that, well,
[35:55] Speaker 3: if we're talking about Gaza, things have changed, it's not
[35:58] Speaker 3: the same anymore. If Netanyahu was thinking that he's going
[36:01] Speaker 3: to occupy for himself. Well, hold on, we have other plans.
[36:07] Speaker 3: So I don't know whether you know, he might support
[36:09] Speaker 3: Israel but for American interests. So everything is for from
[36:15] Speaker 3: America centric. He's looking inwards, not to be a global
[36:19] Speaker 3: statesman and right and a global leader, because that's he
[36:23] Speaker 3: already is, right.
[36:24] Speaker 2: I think I think, I think you hit the nail
[36:26] Speaker 2: on the head there.
[36:26] Speaker 1: I think that I was listening to some fantastic analysis
[36:29] Speaker 1: coming in from especially from Asia, where a lot of
[36:31] Speaker 1: diplomats are saying that, look, big countries like America, India
[36:35] Speaker 1: tend to be historically inward looking, right for them, because
[36:38] Speaker 1: their societies are internally so complex and so large, it's
[36:41] Speaker 1: difficult for them to devote much attention globally. And if
[36:43] Speaker 1: you look at America's history, that's pretty much what it
[36:45] Speaker 1: was like.
[36:45] Speaker 2: For its own history.
[36:46] Speaker 1: And for the last fifty to sixty years we saw
[36:48] Speaker 1: an avidation of history, the Cold War and so on,
[36:50] Speaker 1: the Second World War, America was very.
[36:52] Speaker 2: Very externally involved.
[36:53] Speaker 1: Now you're seeing a correction to what the historical knowledge
[36:55] Speaker 1: is that big countries like India, like America are inward looking,
[36:59] Speaker 1: and that's what you're seeing with fight, you fight your wars,
[37:01] Speaker 1: but we are not going to be as engaged in
[37:03] Speaker 1: those confects, not as me, we're not going to be engaged.
[37:05] Speaker 2: But the rule book for how things used to play out.
[37:08] Speaker 3: I think he just wants to play a negotiator.
[37:10] Speaker 2: Right, not a provocate correct.
[37:12] Speaker 3: But it does seem that not provocator, not instigator, not
[37:17] Speaker 3: a stakeholder.
[37:18] Speaker 1: And it does seem like the rule book as it were,
[37:21] Speaker 1: that you know, the European seems so fond of, but
[37:22] Speaker 1: that India seems to be fairly comfortable operating without seems
[37:26] Speaker 1: to have been town up. It seems that Donald Trump
[37:28] Speaker 1: is really out for his own national interests. He is
[37:30] Speaker 1: there to end those wars, and beyond that, I don't
[37:33] Speaker 1: think he brings that sort of view of what the
[37:35] Speaker 1: international order the system should look like, what traditionally people
[37:38] Speaker 1: think of his statesmanship, but as Donald Trump is his
[37:40] Speaker 1: own brand of statesmanship. But on that note, perhaps we
[37:44] Speaker 1: end this episode of Geita's World. Thank you so much
[37:48] Speaker 1: for joining us here on Geita's World, for watching this,
[37:51] Speaker 1: for leaving your comments and your views on the show.
[37:54] Speaker 2: We value any comments or views that you have.
[37:58] Speaker 3: Absolutely please keep writing into us it's always nice to know.
[38:01] Speaker 2: I even have a number for you that to tell
[38:03] Speaker 2: you about giving.
[38:04] Speaker 3: Your feedback is appreciated and anything any criticism is taken
[38:09] Speaker 3: as constructive criticism will.
[38:11] Speaker 1: Improve and so I will also add to that that
[38:13] Speaker 1: you can leave a comment and write to us at
[38:16] Speaker 1: this number eight five double eight nine, double six, double
[38:19] Speaker 1: nine six, or you can write to us at boards
[38:22] Speaker 1: at the rate.
[38:22] Speaker 2: India today dot com.
[38:24] Speaker 1: Thank you again so much for watching this one hundred
[38:26] Speaker 1: and nineteenth episode of Keiita's Word. Thank you

Shows are listed from Apple Podcasts' charts and directory, and Podcast Index where it is used. Every show and episode belongs to its publisher and plays from the publisher's own feed; this site hosts none of them.