YouTube Transcript:
Jaishankar_ Stubb_ Huntsman_ Nusseibeh_ Tocci on Geopolitical Shifts in 2025

I think calling the change saying this
is your alternative or else it's the law
of the Jungle is a kind of scare
mongering tactic it isn't the law of the
Jungle I mean it's from a very cozy room
everything looks like the law of the
jungle out there it's a more competitive
world it's a world where more countries
have the freedom and the choice to
pursue their interests I mean if that's
the jungle I'll take my chances on it
because I'd rather be in that jungle
than be in the pen which a few people
controlled
good afternoon thank you once again for
joining us for today's lunch uh titled
exception and exceptionalism deciphering
the 2025 world order my name is Sharon
Sterling I'm the Chief Operating Officer
of ORF America one of the hosts together
with the Observer Research Foundation of
today's lunch and this is done in
partnership with the India's Ministry of
external Affairs um distinguished
panelists need no introduction among
this group but uh let me just go ahead
and do that uh starting from the far
right his Excellency Alexander stub
president of the Republic of Finland his
Excellency SJ Shankar minister of
external Affairs of the Republic of
India Her Excellency Lana nbe from the
assistant Minister for political Affairs
and Envoy of the Minister of Foreign
Affairs from the United Arab Emirates
Ambassador John Huntsman Vice chairman
and president of strategic growth at
MasterCard and Dr Natalie toi director
Instituto aario International Italy and
our moderator today will be Dr Samir San
who is the president of the Observer
Research Foundation but before I turn it
over to him to kick things off please um
welcome the ambassador of India to
Germany um Ambassador anjet gup for a
few words of
welcome excellencies dignitaries and
dear friends it gives me immense
pleasure to invite all of you for the
fifth edition of the ORF Forum lunch
this has become a much anticipated
tradition of the Munich security
conference the USP of this forum is that
it brings together diverse voices
perspectives and intellectual Acumen
from different parts of the world to
discuss the most challenging and thought
Pro provoking contemporary
issues excellencies the long-standing
India Germany relationship has grown
from strength to strength in the last
few decades last year was particularly
momentous we had the seventh
intergovernmental consultations in New
Delhi and October 2024 our bilateral
trade reached a new high of $33.3
billion Investments grew both ways and
defense and security cooperation G
gathered renewed
momentum the Indian diaspora is growing
rapidly and you can see them in
different parts of
Germany they are making an important
contribution to the German economy in
the 25th year of our strategic
partnership we look forward with
optimism to even greater engagement
particularly in the field of security
cooperation and new and critical
Technologies the panelists don't need
any introduction in particular our
external affairs minister is able to
condense entire encyclopedic work uh
books into a couple of witty comments
which are then quoted time and again but
I look for forward to hearing the
panelist thank
you thank you Ambassador and
um okay uh so let me start with this
panel now I I had earlier described this
panel in slightly more uh verbos terms
economic exceptionalism fraying
multilateralism uh the normalization of
sovereign action but I thought maybe the
world order today can be broken into an
easy
definition people who like JD want's
speech and people who don't like JD
want's speech
and I think that's the world order today
and in some sense it might not be a bad
point of departure to have a
conversation on where we are and and in
some ways how are we going to respond to
those big questions of connectivity of
climate action of trade that lifts uh
the 45 billion who are still to benefit
from globalization discovering peace in
Europe discovering peace in the Middle
East in Africa in many other parts of
the world how are we going to respond to
it in this new mood that prevails uh and
let me start with the president stub
um you had a book coming out and you
still have a book coming out which in
some ways um put the world into three
easy containers as it were or three
corners and and the interplay between
them in your view was the future of the
world order does that theor still hold
yeah well thanks thanks Sam and thanks
for having me here um just to summarize
that the name of the book is uh the
triangle of power rebalancing the New
World Order uh I started writing it when
Donald Trump finished his first term and
I finished writing it when Donald Trump
began uh his second term so the world
has changed in between quite a lot the
big thesis is that there are three
spheres of power the global West the
global east and the global South and
various variations thereof the global
West used to be driven by the United
States wanting to maintain the current
world order multilateral institutions
norms and rules the global east about 25
countries led by China and Russ Russia
wants to break them change them at least
and my big thesis is that the global
South uh 125 countries un fairly lumped
into one will be the decider the global
South is going to be the one that
changes it and inside the global South
you have a few swing States big powers
like India and I don't say this only
because the two of you are here um Saudi
Arabia Nigeria Kenya South Africa uh
Argentina Brazil Mexico now my big
thesis is that the world can tilt in
three different directions because my
thesis is that this is our 1918 1945 and
1989 moment when a world order is
changing it'll take about 10 years and
it can tilt in three directions one is a
multipolar
transactional world without any kind of
clear set rules we form these uh Unholy
alliances between different players
which are not very often values based or
interest based that's one possibility
and of course if we look at say the
United States at the moment that's the
direction in which they might be taking
it the second option is the
regionalization of power so basically we
start seeing globalization become
regionalized we start seeing um types of
uh value chains being brought home and
then my third option which is my
preferred one is that we see a rejuven
of
multilateralism because I believe that
multilateralism leads to order but in
order for that to happen the West
especially needs to understand that we
need to rebalance the power we need to
give an agency and more power to the
global South starting from the UN
Security Council and so on and so forth
why do I suggest this and this is my
final point because this is what you
asked precisely at a time when we
probably need
cooperation more than ever we're
rejecting it Global Goods such as
technology or artificial intelligence
such as a such as energy uh such as
demography uh or uh information in
general climate change you cannot solve
that without common rules and standards
so this is my sort of quick take on the
book I guess so president let me ask you
a quick followup um in this scenario
that you've just vividly painted for us
uh why do you suppose and I'm I'm giving
you an anecdotal uh experience you know
it's anecdotal based experience why do
you suppose that there is far greater
acceptance of the Trump 2.0 phenomena in
the global South than there is in Europe
it's anecdotal but I travel across I
think you're right I think you're
absolutely right uh it is because it is
in the vested interest for some in the
global South correctly to try to play
ball directly over the institution so my
argument is that what we're seeing now
from the global West is power Nostalgia
of a system that doesn't really exist
anymore whereas from the global South
we're seeing great you know what we
don't always necessarily want to play
ball with China we don't always want to
play ball with Russia but now if we're
interested if we're interesting we can
start playing ball with the United
States so it's much more direct forward
but of course anecdote Le Ence let's be
uh quite honest I didn't see too many
Applause when President Trump suggested
that Gaza should become a Rivier true
true but you know the world order today
very early days of the New World Order
yeah very much so but but it also can be
defined as those who have met Trump and
those who have not met Trump till now
one of them is here with us Dr SJ shank
Trump in his second term coming back
from DC having traveled Europe
extensively in the last few weeks having
been to the Middle East um a number of
uh sites there how do you assess what's
happening
today uh well
uh clearly a lot of new things some of
which was predictable if we were tuned
into what was coming out of the US for
the last year or before that perhaps
even
longer uh obviously lot of anxieties in
some parts of the world lot of
opportunities for many I think the
what's important is to kind of assess it
without getting to emotional or you know
attached to your habits you know
understand that this is a change which
is upon us uh whether we like it or not
it's happening by the way we do like
some parts of it definitely uh so uh and
then look to see where are the openings
and and the possibilities out there so
uh uh you know there are uh uh to my
mind uh I mean if I could pick up on
what president stop said I mean one of
the issues we have struggled with in a
way is a kind of
hegemonism uh of of the global
West uh and you know I uh hear a lot of
uh talk today about say uh
uh external interference or political
interference but in a way the same thing
was happening in the name of Human
Rights and values and so on so uh when
we look at it there are now
possibilities of evening out this
conversation that many uh many practices
which were supposedly Universal which
were not we have now a greater ability
to push back uh to say that well it may
work that way where you're concerned but
that isn't so for everybody so I I would
argue in a way there's a greater
opportunity in a more
um uh Diversified World differentiated
world to have more democratic
conversations so the the persistent push
for universalism that moment you believe
is now perhaps facing a severe push back
I I think that kind of globalization
uh there was a economic
uh Foundation uh to it and there was an
ideological super structure to it uh I
think the super structure definitely is
challenged if not discredited I think
the uh Foundation is being contested uh
so today when we say okay let's have
more resilient reliable Supply chains
that's a polite way of saying I contest
that model of globalization where all
roads lead to one geography mhm I when
you say that you know let's have an
active debate you're challenging The
View that there is one truth and it has
to come out of people in New York mhm
I'm going to come to someone from New
York but just in a bit but let me first
turn to natti I natti I could not help
but read your Tweet last night and it
kind of provokes some some thoughts in
my head and and you know I was like I
could see European anger against what JD
Wan said yesterday
and I was like you know what this speech
could have been given to any Global
South Country by any person from Europe
America at any given point of time in
the last 80 years we have heard such
speeches given to us in our auditoriums
by folks coming from this part of the
world all the time a democracy as large
as ours is told by barely surviving
democracies that you need to learn our
model of of bringing collectives
together so I by the way I took some
pleasure in seeing some pain
that some people felt when they were
lectured to and I love that line that if
Greta tunin lectured the world on energy
choices you can possibly hear Elon Musk
lecture the world on on on technology
choices so just your you since you have
tweeted about it I want to I want a fair
European assessment of where you where
you think this relationship the
transatlantic partnership is headed in
the next year four so let me perhaps
sort of um start with where we are in
this journey on order or disorder end
with with JD Vance in Europe um so it
seems to me that there are sort of three
steps in this journey step number one
we've been at this for a while the end
of the unipolar uh order and the the
unipolar system and with it the end of
the liberal International order right
with increasing contestation of that
order we went through a phase of
debating about how to reform
institutions and all the rest of it and
that was kind of step one we then enter
step two okay so what's the new shape of
the International System is it bipolar
is it multipolar is it tripolar so what
is it and especially after Russia's
large scale invasion of Ukraine we start
getting and the US China competition
leading to the debate on on decoupling
we start getting this feeling that
perhaps what this is doing to order is
uh leading to a multi-order world right
uh of of Separation there are still
rules and Norms but basically different
parts of the world subscribe to
different norms and rules I think we're
entering now stage three in this journey
right and stage three in this journey is
actually a world which is non-polar and
by non-polar what I mean is firstly
there is no real ideological glue uh
tying different countries or or regions
uh together uh and and that where
transactionalism is on the rise uh and
where basically it's kind of the law of
the Jungle right uh and of course if
you're down that food chain you're kind
of increasingly in trouble and this is
where we get to JD Vance so to me the
troubling aspect of that speech was not
so much I mean you know the whole
freedom of expression thing was just a
bit weird Frankly Speaking but okay fine
you know let's have a conversation about
it but it's um the freedom of expression
and you are moving away from your values
conversation followed by uh well eight
days before an election and followed by
a meeting uh with the leader of a far
right sort of Neo-Nazi party right um
that kind of suggests that the aim is
not that of having a debate about
freedom of expression but the aim is
that of deliberately not just weakening
but perhaps even destroying the
foundations of liberal democracy in
Europe and European integration to the
extent to which these far right parties
are explicitly euroskeptic and and
Nationalist and so and this is why I
come come to the law of the Jungle and
the non-polar system right because a
pole presumably is not just a country I
mean a pole has a sort of series of
Partners and allies and friends that it
works with and here we have the very
deliberate attempt at prevaricating and
indeed po possibly destroying what those
partners and allies were all
about I want to ask you something about
Ukraine but I'm going to hold that
pieace right now I will to come back to
Ukraine I think that's an important
issue but I do want to leave a thought
with you that if I was to make a list of
envoys from Europe and America who have
gone and met uh quasi Anarchist in my
country that list would be endless and
and there would be you know the global
South that you mentioned may not find
that really odd behavior that's it
doesn't make it right no I'm not saying
it's right I'm just saying it is not an
odd behavior uh folks I think Samir is
getting kicks out of this I can
sense good friend I'm just wondering why
is Europe so upset with something that
was so predictable
I mean that speech was written a long
time back and it was only delivered
yesterday and you surprised you never
heard it but but I'm going to come to
Ukraine I want to come to both of you on
Ukraine let me turn to Lana Lana uh and
finally you're going to defend America
so but but I'm going to first come to
Lana Lana you've spent a lot of time in
New York and you understand the power of
collectives of collaboration of building
Partnerships especially on projects that
are long-term by definition peace
connectivity infrastructure energy
transitions these are long-term projects
that require sustainable Partnerships in
a world that is in many ways thriving on
short-termism on
transactionalism uh on in some ways uh
convenience of of the opportunity that
is available how do you build something
sustainable especially from The Gaze
that you have sitting in the Middle East
which requires which is actually
witnessing all of this at the same time
energy transitions economic transitions
search for peace new Partnerships and
connectivity how do you look at the
world thank you Samir and I'd like to
just quickly refer to uh the president's
comment on how we reacted to president
Trump's Gaza Riviera statement and I'd
say we'd welcome Gaza becoming a Riviera
of the Middle East but a Riviera of a
Palestinian State as the Arab position
so you know I think there's some
agreement there but it's just about what
the end point is in terms of the
political Horizon for the Palestinians
uh more broadly to your question and uh
New York and where Dr J Shanker has said
power has for so long where the rules
have been given and taken by a different
configuration of countries uh and many
of us have spent some time with Dr
Kissinger there and I remember the book
he wrote on trust and mistrust in the
transatlantic partnership uh that he
spoke about in one of our discussions
and his agent was quite surprised by how
well the book was doing until uh he
found out that it was in the marriage
and divorce section of most of the
libraries and bookshops in the country
and the reason I turned to that is
because a lot of these issues in terms
of Partnerships that you're talking
about are about not putting the kind of
effort that goes into a relationship
when it's taken for granted and I think
that's to answer your question on the
UAE position and many countries in the
global South's position effort needs to
be put in in a regular way into a
marital relationship and it needs to be
put into the Partnerships that we have
developed over the years with our
strategic Partners including uh the
great Powers so that's the first point
and when we don't find the return on
that investment I think as Dr J Shanker
has said we are looking for the right to
diversify our portfolio of Investments
our economic Bridges our Partnerships
with other countries in terms of defense
and security and I think that is the
word world order we are moving to it's
not necessarily transactional but I
think it's cleare eyed and pragmatic
about the state of the the world as it
is today so that would be the second
point for the UAE we're an economic Hub
uh we managed to become that way by
being agile diplomatically and
economically we've signed over 20 free
trade agreements we negotiated with
India most famously in 888 days at the
directives of uh Dr J Shanker and our
foreign minister we've been trying to
negotiate one with Europe for 30 years
oh we are 23 I'll let that sink in as
the mood music in Europe is about
competitiveness economic competitiveness
uh strategic uh autonomy and
Independence uh increasing defense
spending you need to create an agile
bureaucratic structure and diplomatic
structure that responds to the needs of
today's world and that goes to your
connectivity Point uh yesterday Prime
Minister Modi and president Trump came
out with a joint statement from
Washington it referred to two really
interesting initiatives that came out of
India and the UAE the IMC and the I2 UT
that's the kind of connective tissue
today that countries are looking for in
their Partnerships so we want to connect
through trade we want to connect through
rail we want to create jobs and
opportunities for the 140 million youth
in the Mina region uh who are looking
for stability and economic prosperity
and security we won't be able to provide
that necessarily through the traditional
platforms but we shouldn't give up on
the traditional platforms the Norms
exist whether we're in a 1945 moment or
a cold war moment or a 1930s moment
where we're looking at the signs and
worrying about what comes next the mood
mun music in Munich this you know two
days has clearly been quite downbeat I
think we have to respond to this moment
with some agility with some flexibility
and with some creativity those are
things that smaller countries who are
not so trapped in the bigger
bureaucratic structures can do uh and I
think that's to the point of bringing in
different size powers to see what kind
of Leverage they can bring to the table
in terms of keeping some of the very
good rules of the road in place um L I'm
going to come back to the Middle East in
just a bit I want to have a little bit
of a conversation on what could be the
road pathway ahead but Ambassador John
hman let me turn to
you as you explain what's happening
today are we seeing an American am which
is becoming expensive rather than rather
than retreating uh or is it choosing the
spaces that it wants to be present in
and forfeiting some of its overheads in
other uh domains where it had little
returns uh that it that it calculated
over the P past few years so what is
really happening here is it an expansive
America a retreating America and
isolationist America what is America
today please explain to us well first of
all it's a pleasure to be here and let
me just say this is a topic that lends
itself to heavy drinking so we're in the
right
place
um I'm always amazed at how often people
misread the United
States I think there's a lot of hand
ringing unnecessarily so so the United
States is made up of 50 Sovereign
entities called States they all have
their own Constitution they all have
their own legislature they all have
their own Economic Development plans and
educational strategies and they
determined the cycles of success in the
United States Washington is largely
irrelevant now that may sound strange
because we're all fixated on the latest
phenomenon called Donald Trump but
that's the way the United States works
and because of that the cycles of
politics in Washington will continue
sometimes appearing as if it were a 19
1964 Ford Fairmont running off the side
of the road ready to kill the driver but
we have to take a step back and say okay
what really makes America
run and every one of the states in
America have their own trading
relationships they have their own
International strategies I know because
I was governor of a state uh and we in
this room make a mistake by not reading
America as it was designed to operate so
so that's point number one point number
two is uh the Trump phenomenon is an
expression of the American people we've
seen we've seen a massive diminution of
trust in politics I think everywhere
including the global South that's why
you see a lot of people who have glommed
on to Trump's message because the voters
have been failed by their sovereigns
institutions are increasingly seen as
irrelevant uh even though I think
they'll be recharged over time uh and
right now the American political
Zeitgeist is playing to the hometown
crowd so yes we heard JD Vance's speech
yesterday and for those who were shocked
by it I would say shocked by what were
you not following the campaign did you
not hear the rhetoric and many thought
well the rhetoric would discontinue uh
upon the inauguration that's not how the
Trump machine operates so JD came and he
gave a speech and I think it was largely
tailored for a certain constituency and
audience not here so this is kind of the
new kind of rhythm of Washington MH uh
and I think the Rhythm will continue in
a transactional nature I think Trump is
very much based on personal
relationships so you say well how will
trade policy go well the trade policy
function in Washington is way different
than it's ever been USR used to call the
shots I was there at one point as the
deputy us trade representative and uh
negotiate trade deals during this
Administration you're going to see
something different I think you're going
to see Trump develop relationships if he
likes relationships if he gets along
well with somebody if he sees common
cause and the extension of America's
interests he's going to negotiate deals
I think India is a perfect example of
that uh so I think we're in this Mode
Call It Whatever you want you I 10 terms
come to mind but I don't think any of
them are necessarily fitting because
we're running up against the cycles of
American politics which I think we lose
sight of and that is Trump has one term
which means he has not four years but
two because you've got the midterm
elections that strike it less than two
years from now and the House of
Representatives is likely to be lost
because you've got the house up by one
and the midterm Cycles generally will
favor the party out of power the Senate
May Be Shaken it's hard to know uh and
then you've got a lame duck status and
the race for 28 has begun so I think in
looking at and analyzing Trump I think
we need to understand that yes
conservative M of some kind might
Prevail unless there's massive overreach
and a blowback which is not unusual in
American politics and we'll be back to
kind of a more identifiable familiar
pattern but right now we're not there so
I want to ask you and Dr Janka to
respond to this particular aspect that
you actually um very you know lucidly
described the American people have
spoken uh American elections are an
expression of their people uh I would
suggest that over the last few Cycles
including the election of Biden you
would find that certain changes in
America are definite irrespective of the
party that is in power for example uh
exclusive economic policy Ira inflation
deduction Act was a muscular industrial
policy that was serving its own
industrial aspects the China policy
bilateral consensus um the decision to
invest in certain relationships for
example the US India relationship
bipartisan consensus the Middle East
transformation bipartisan consensus the
the point I'm trying to make here is
that while the elections may be in two
years America may have changed
dramatically and some of its cousins
across the Atlantic are not getting that
message it does not M Trump is not the
problem here they are not reading
America right and what you were
mentioning and do you think is that the
problem that America has changed and the
world is still negotiating with the 1945
America and that's my question to Dr J
Shankar as but first to you Ambassador I
I would say that America is changing
somewhat uh I think it's changing based
upon a number of things I think it's
changing based
upon Co which I think Shell Shocked the
American people and when you look at the
private sector's response to co every
boardroom in America is having the same
conversation how do we redesign and
rebuild Supply chains because they all
collapsed during co uh which had a
massive implication on employment for
example uh I think we were
dumbstruck um by the' 08 financial
crisis and you keep layering things upon
each other the rise of China has shaken
many people in the United States and the
net result is an inward look at
rebuilding the fundamental building
blocks of of The American Nation some
people call it isolationism uh Trump
calls it rebuilding rebuilding from
within and I think that is a trend that
is likely to continue so the idea of
bush internationalism or Reagan
internationalism I think we get back to
it some point because I think we need to
with the rest of the world economies
will have to expand beyond their own
borders but for the time being it will
be a moment of domestic rebuild and
whether that's Trump or somebody who
runs in his place I think a message will
be similarly tailored to that cry out by
the American people for one reason
rebuilding trust which no longer exists
in
politics uh two notes of
dissent the first one about something
Natalie said
look I think think calling it calling
the change saying this is your
alternative or else it's the law of the
Jungle is a kind of scaremongering
tactic it isn't the law of the Jungle I
mean it's from a very cozy room
everything looks like the law of the
jungle out there it's a more competitive
world it's a world where more countries
have the freedom and the choice to
pursue their interests I mean if that's
a jungle I'll take my chances on it
because i' rather be in that jungle than
be in the when which of few people
controlled or the garden the or the
garden the gardens so that's one descent
I like the I like desent the second
descent uh look uh I take John's point
but I think he's
underestimating
Washington I think you'll get enough
things in those two years or less which
will profoundly change the world so the
50 states may carry on with a model but
because the president of the United
States holds such exceptional power and
the country has so much influence that
within a matter this period in fact I
would predict much earlier that you're
going to get po policies which will
reshape the international order as we
have got used to so I would not uh you
know I'm saying this in a very I'm not
saying it's good or bad I'm just
predicting what is to come and something
big I think is coming at us uh my third
point is where I agree with him uh is
look I I do think around the world uh
politics and
politicians have generally got
discredited I think there's a loss of
trust I would again argue we are a bit
of an exception it's not it'll be very
tough today in a really Democratic
Society for anybody to get three
continuous terms which is what has
happened in India but we are an outlier
uh in this respect but it's not just
politics which has got discredited I
think uh in a way diplomacy has got
discredited the international economy
has got discredited the kind of uh model
which we have
touted as being universally good is seen
by many people as being built on their
jobs which were taken away from them in
India for example there's if you look at
small uh you know and medium producers I
mean they they are very angered at the
kind of dumping of goods which is taking
place in the Indian market we all know
from where so so I I think we are
dealing today with a much more
disillusioned um unhappy World which is
ready for change which says that look I
don't believe all that non law of jungle
stuff which I've been hearing for so
many years I am now prepared to take my
chances in whatever life eyes out there
because I think it'll definitely be
better than what I have today and just a
quick one uh democracy itself and you
know since you mentioned uh democracy in
your intervention Are We Now reaching a
stage that we are perpetually polarized
Democratic societies which means unless
our side wins democracy is not good have
we reached that stage that unless your
team wins democracy is bad we see that
in the US we see that in India to some
extent we see that in different parts
that unless who you vote for wins the
election are not good well uh sorry I
know no I'm coming to now I'm coming to
Ukraine very soon no but look I'll put
it to you this way I know people will
say that but if by the next election
they're not saying it democracy is fine
you know they will say it in the
aftermath of a loss you know that okay
the S you know the system wasn't good
that's why I didn't win but if they gear
up for the next election I think we are
uh underestimating the
and theit of democracy and actually the
attachment which people have to the
exercise of individual choices I think
we are too quick to dismiss it because
somewhere politics has not gone the way
some people would like it to go yeah I
think on Democracy our misconception is
sort of linked to this whole end of
History thesis of fukuyama which I
firmly believed in myself that all
nation states of the world World 200 of
them would revert to a combination of
liberal democracy social market economy
could have believed that exactly well no
I'm I'm a fin I'm a fin I'm a fin but I
think there but this is again you know
we we we come yeah yeah and but I mean
again that is not my point my my point
is that the fallacy and the mistake that
people like myself made at the time was
to think of democracy as an end state or
some something static democracy is never
that it's always messy and complicated
the thing that makes me believe in
democracy apart from you know Free
Speech open
Society um institutions rule of law
protection of minorities human rights
and fundamental rights is a
self-correcting mechanism that democracy
has because autocracies don't have that
now then we have to ask ourselves the
question what do we need to avoid
getting into this cycle where you know
Democratic change is basically constant
every two years or every four years I
think what has happened is that
democracy has not adapted to technology
democracy originally as crafted Say by
John Loach and his likes was supposed to
be slow messy and compromise seeking but
now we have a new instrument that has
come into play which is technology in
the beginning many of us thought that
technology was going to work only for
good and everyone will be liberated to
free speech and and the rest of it but
now we have suddenly seen that as a
matter of fact technology doesn't
necessarily adapt to democracy so I
remember not I'm not that old but in the
olden days politicians had about three
months to answer to the media then they
had about 3 weeks then suddenly it was 3
days then it was 3 hours then it was 3
minutes and it was 30 seconds and now
unless you put out something on X within
3 seconds that something has happened
and then we get into this cacophony of
information and I don't think democracy
has yet understood that information is
not wisdom so that's what I'm trying to
say that democracy needs to adapt all
the time uh and we have to understand
that right now it's in a certain
direction which some people uh don't
like but at some stage it'll adapt back
I think they're all making the case for
stable monarchies yeah well feel but
yeah philosopher philosopher Kings
philosopher Kings yeah eventually you
will agree with her exactly I will agree
but can I and I will respect your
people's vote on that yeah thanks okay
Nat yeah I mean I just wanted to come
back to this jungle business um I mean I
think we would all agree I also want you
to give me a quick prognosis from where
you're sitting on what could be uh the
future of the Ukraine okay uh quick uh
but on on the jungle business I mean I
think we would all agree that it is
right um that the rules of the road are
determined by not just one power and
that different players should be able to
shape the system and use the system for
their benefit I mean I think there's
kind of you know there would probably be
broad agreement on this um I think where
we get into jungle territory and I think
we would also all agree that including
Minister J shanka that it would not be
such a good thing if there are no such
rules at all and that if me and
president stob uh sign a contract I
assume that they is some sort of
institution out there that will make
sure that he respects the contract and
that if he doesn't I can sue him right
now if those institutions are destroyed
if those rules are eroded if nothing
does anyone about them anything about
them then then we are in that jungle
territory where if you are down in the
food chain you're in big trouble and
surely that is a situation that we no
one really wants to be in because indeed
if you are down that food chain you're
in immediate trouble but presumably even
if you're up there sooner or later you
are going to run into trouble um so to
me it's it should be a conversation
about about those rules about what we
think about them and especially about
how we collectively are going to do
something in order to ensure their
respect which gets me to Ukraine um so I
mean who knows what's going to happen
you know I mean I think we basically are
into two possible scenarios uh here
scenario number one um so I would tend
to exclude uh piece disagreement
scenario I think what at most we can
think might happen is a scenario in
which there is some sort of Truth and
then the question and it becomes a very
European discussion about what we can do
to ensure that that truth becomes um
more or less sustainable uh and this is
where we get into uh conversations about
uh defense both European Defense more
broadly but also continuing Military
Support uh for Ukraine um uh deterrence
troops I kind of you know I'm reluctant
to Define them as peacekeepers because I
don't really think there is going to be
a peace to keep anyway so that's sort of
one scenario then you have a second
scenario in which negotiations begin and
they continue and they continue and they
continue and in the meantime War
continues and continues and continues
and in that scenario which actually I
think is more likely than the first
scenario what I don't know but I'd love
to hear Ambassador huntsman's sort of
views on is what would Donald Trump do
would he basically just kind of get feel
slighted and get annoyed and double down
magically in in supporting Ukraine or I
fear get bored and look for his Nobel
Peace Prize elsewhere okay I'm going to
come to you Alexander you wanted to come
in sorry you want no no it's okay I mean
um so okay I I come from a country which
has
1,340 km of border with Russia I come
from a country country that fought
winter War and the war of continuation
with Russia and fought about the three
key principles of statehood one is
Independence the second is sovereignty
and the third one is territorial
Integrity we retained our independence
the only bordering country to the Soviet
Union at the time to do that the rest of
them became Soviet Satellites we lost
our sovereignty our right to choose
where we wanted to be European
institutions or otherwise and we lost
10% of our territory including the land
where my grandparents and my father was
born so this is the prism through which
we look at Russia's war or of aggression
uh in Ukraine and I you know Dr J
Shankar's legendary comment from Globes
sec in the olden times is that olden
times olden times because it's like
three years ago right something like
that but he was completely right to say
that we do a lot of Naval gazing in
Europe and we only care about our Wars
and expect everyone to care about our
Wars
whereas uh the other way around it
doesn't work my thesis on Ukraine given
the situation is that we need to look at
it in three phases the first phase is to
strengthen Ukraine militarily and try to
be as tough on Russia as possible with
sanctions frozen assets and increasing
military in Ukraine to give Ukraine a
position of strength to begin the
negotiations second phase and here's
perhaps where I unusually disagree with
Natalie a little bit is a ceasefire not
a peace process there's a bit of an
Italian Vie there right you were in
Florence at some point it was I was was
so we need a ceasefire and that
ceasefire basically needs to have a
demarcation of the border and then after
that you start talking about the agenda
of the peace and of course there needs
to be some kind of security security
Arrangements in place the third phase is
the long phase which we don't know where
it's going to end that is a peace
process and that means that you start
looking at territory you start looking
at SEC my question is this is what you
want it to be yeah what do you think it
is going to be that's what it's going to
be you know so the question is do you
think if if if the US has a different
view Europe is ready to walk alone to
make this happen uh I don't think it's a
binary question because Europe is not
going to walk Al alone but if you want a
conceptualization thereof on the
security Arrangements basically Ukraine
stands up and keeps it Europe supports
and gives the backup and the US gives a
back stop so the tradeoff there is that
the US doesn't put boots on the ground
but Europe does in one way or another
but obviously this is a long and what
people need to understand and believe me
we in Finland know Putin and we know
Russia he is an imperialist he is a
colonialist and a revisionist the only
thing that he understands is power
anytime you give in to Putin he will hit
you back twice harder so therefore you
need to put Ukraine into a position of
strength and I think already the fact
that seninsky didn't you know approve
the mineral deal or said that we cannot
have neg Neo iations between the US and
Russia on this is an indication there's
no other choice Ambassador did you want
to come in on this I'd love to please
because it scares me to
death uh I I think we're terribly naive
in the west about Putin y uh the
president is absolutely right uh I think
this is an opportunity however it plays
out for a number of leading countries of
the world to come together to find a
solution because I don't think it's just
the United States that should be part of
this
endgame my my fear is
this uh Putin is a master at uh dirty
tricks and at malign activity we've seen
it in Georgia 2008 and Beyond annexing
what now
we uh abazia South OA we've I'm I'm
concerned deeply about
mdova um he'll take the land in Ukraine
uh however this deal is cut that will
likely be part of it uh the security
guarantee will have to be negotiated I
think that will be probably the most
difficult part uh some sort of
peacekeeping arrangement but what I fear
most is this is a holding pattern for
Putin he'll claim victory and move on
and he'll wait wait for the next
election in
Ukraine and he will hope for a 2010
outcome and hope to control whomever
wins that election he'll flood the field
with propaganda disinformation and cut
out candidates and I think his goal
longterm will be not just the land the
20% that he's already succeeded in
getting but ultimately finding a
political subsidiary in keev that he can
control yep exactly and that will be his
victory yep Lana yes a sustainable
durable vision for the Middle East how
do you see it play out early days I
don't think we can reach a conclusion
now but how do
you sense the mood now in that region so
the mood is obviously uh a little bit uh
pessimistic um about the broader
trajectory of the last two years but I
think there have been some openings in
the past month that we need to build on
um the big picture obviously is how us
for policy in the region plays out Visa
uh two heimans Israel and Iran as well
as Saudi Arabia and other Regional
actors the Tactical questions are how we
resolve crises and that goes to your
point point on is the International
System today able to cope with the
current
crisis Dr J Shanker says we should see
what's coming and understand that change
needs to come in order to take a hold of
take stock of these conflicts and
actually resolve them and I think we
agree with that so under 60 conflicts
currently across the globe more than any
time since World War II however much we
are all attached to the International
System and the way it works it hasn't
it's been broken and it's been broken by
a number of conflicts over the past two
decades and it's been broken by the fact
we haven't been able to resolve those
conflicts we've been managing them so
whether it's Ukraine whether it's Gaza
whether it's October 7th whether it's
the broader Middle East uh we have a
moment of opportunity today we have a
possibility to build a stable future for
Lebanon for the first time in years uh
we have engagement with a uh complex
Syrian government today on the ground
nonetheless that it's giving out the
right uh signals and statements about
what it SE for its future in Syria
inclusivity obviously being a core
tenant of stability across the region um
and we have uh what is coming in terms
of uh where Iran fits in the region and
where Israel fits in the region as you
well know the uae's perspective as a
pragmatic uh and uh I think cleare eyed
investor in stability and the force
projection of stability in the region we
believe in the integration model so we
think all of these countries need to be
integrated and that economic
Partnerships are are the way to arrive
at that integration but it is going to
take a lot of work it comes back to that
really uh popular term today which is
regional Burdon sharing um but I think
that's it's a very good point I think
that regions have to come forward with
their own Solutions uh to some of these
issues and they have to be bolstered by
the presence of an international uh
Community that's what we're looking at
you know I think your example on Co was
a really good one for why
diversification has happened in the last
few years we all believe we all bought
into the globalization theory that we uh
are now connected uh that borders um the
nation state as it traditionally was uh
would not affect the equitable
distribution of vaccines of medication
uh of you know sharing knowledge on
Health Systems I think Co was a rude
awakening for a number of countries in
the global South that had to suddenly
selfinvest in these industries in their
own country so that Independence I don't
necessarily think is a bad thing I think
it was a good shot of adrenaline to the
system
we needed a geopolitical shot we needed
a geoeconomic shot and we've had them
and for the Middle East we plan to work
together in a likeminded collection of
countries with those who want to partner
with us to try and create a future that
is stable and prosperous uh and built
around integration of all of these
countries in the region we need to make
the case for that integration and we
will make that case so we're going to
take three questions from the audience
we have 11 minutes 10 minutes I know you
have to leave at 245 uh president 250
250 so we'll try to get you first uh so
we have a hand here we have Michael here
so can we have a mic to Michael we'll go
to Michael first then we'll go to my
friend from Portugal and let me go to
and let me go
to there you are let let me turn to
Peter then from Slovenia so we have our
three questions Michael first to you uh
first compliments to Samir and the
panelists I think this has been the most
interesting panel of the weekend so
thank you very much my question is to Dr
Janka You said Dr J you descent it from
am bassador huntsman's point about the
importance of states and you said
because of the importance of the the
great power of the office of President
of the United States and because of the
power of the United States in the world
the next two years or even less than
that I think you said are is going to
bring forth changes that will change the
International System and I felt the bar
mom tez sort of reverberating at that
point and I feel you teased Us by saying
that and not going a little further so
you have to give us a bit of a spoiler
alert Dr J shanka and tell us the nature
of these changes that you that you
foresee a permanent seat for India on
the security
Council uh I think there was a there was
a mic there go
ahead Anna go ahead good afternoon I I
just want being a former member of the
European Parliament uh I just want to
highlight and a former member of
Portugal of course to highlight what Mr
Lana said in because of the time that
Europe uh um deal trying to uh to have
an agreement you spend 88 days uh
negotiating a trade deal with India and
30 years uh with Europe so this is our
our biggest mistake and I am totally
support with this idea and I'm more uh
with you about the idea that we need I
like the idea of the shock this is a
shock for us I'm always saying about
that and I I am I'm s of uh question
question question the uh uh poetic
speeches in Europe is I I just want to
highlight this because this is very
important for us in Europe okay so
that's a statement um but but but U you
know I I I do know that negotiating an
FTA is a end in
itself it doesn't need to lead to an FTA
the process is the end itself okay you
you you have to understand the the idea
behind it go ahead Peter yeah thank you
Peter G bled strategic Forum um it was
interesting for me because basically for
the whole panel nobody mentioned China
so probably this is the only panel where
China as uh one of the global Powers was
not mentioned so my question is pretty
simple uh where does China fit in in
what Natalie was saying and also
minister jhanker in this new
uh reality that we are finding ourselves
uh in are they going to play the ball
are they going to
uh try to have an agreement on new rules
which they would abide by how is their
connection with America going on and so
on and so on thanks you know there's a
there's a famous saying that if the
world is a casino China is the house and
The House Always Wins no matter who
shakes the world it's the house that
takes the winnings so I think that's
thank you Peter for asking that how is
China going to respond to many of these
these developments so maybe let's go
down the panel let's start with uh let's
start with you president because I know
you have to leave a little let me start
with you please yeah I I'll just make
two quick remarks first one was the
trade issue I fully agree with you that
Europe is way too slow in forging its
trade agreements having said that I
think it has um over 40 trade agreements
with over 70 countries out of the 200
nation states in the world so it does
have the widest web of free trade
agreements but the way in which it
behaves in these free trade amen it's
simply unacceptable you know it just it
just doesn't and shouldn't be like the
way in which it is uh the second point
is on on China um I had the uh privilege
to spend three and a half hours with
President c shiing um on a state visit
uh last
October um I knew him from before we
spent two hours basically Teta uh
discussing the world order uh my
starting point is obviously that China
is the key player together uh with the
United States
my point is that uh China always plays
the long game you know for China a
centuries only a page in a book whereas
you know we in the past three weeks have
been shocked about the result of the US
elections he's probably looking there
come on guys this is only four years got
nothing to worry about uh what China has
done is strategically extremely wise so
instead of taking the moral High Ground
as we have in the west towards the
global South and elsewhere it has
created strategic relationships which
are finance and infrastructure based it
is now the biggest creditor to 120
countries out of 200 uh in the world
China is also quite wise at playing the
multilateral game it does talk about
multipolarity Etc and of course it
always maximizes its own interest the
negative side of China apart from the
fact that you know I don't share many of
the values portrayed by the Chinese uh
leadership but in my values based
realism there's space for dialogue
because you can't solve the world's big
problems without China for China the
main problem is going to be demography
the demographic curb of China is really
really bad whereas the demographic curve
for India is very very good and that
means that they are actually going to be
in a weaker position but then I think a
lot of this is then this is I stop here
a lot of it is going to depend on on you
know who gets the
technological uh oversight on it but
yeah just on the just on the FDA part
that if you count the top 10 largest
trading relationships none of them are
based on an FDA EU us IND uh you know us
and China China and Japan Japan and us
you go across the world look at the 10
biggest 15 biggest trading relationships
uh they tend to operate outside ftas
what I mean to say is we should try for
an FDA but let's get trade going let's
not just a final point in my mind of
course the WTO should be the center of
it and actually trade is on the up not
on the down as as many people think what
I think will eventually happen if the
Trump Administration continues to
threaten with trade barrier tariffs etc
etc not only is it going to hit the
American General Public uh and the
actually stock markets but what's going
to start happening is the rest of the
world trading around the United States
so you know it'll go in different
directions Nal you are you well I mean
it's actually a segue to what to what
president St was was saying and just
adding a more specific European angle to
the China uh question I mean I think you
know sort of prior to last November the
general direction of travel uh in Europe
was indeed aligning with the United
States uh no longer being star eyed
about China uh realizing that indeed the
economic security agenda Etc had to be
taken seriously and this was the world
of you know perhaps not decoupling but
drisking I think now because of
everything that we've just been uh
talking about um there is a growing
sense of we can't really afford to have
kind of three Wars at the same time
right uh and if we have one with Russia
and we are increasingly in conflict with
the United States uh we may not like
China uh but perhaps this is a time to
look at ways in which to cooperate with
it and I thought it was fascinating
listening to uh Minister y Wang's
statement yesterday
after JD Vance and all of if you were to
just take the snapshot right of
yesterday and of course forget you know
sort of months and years before indeed
you know all of a sudden China kind of
comes across as Europe's best friend
right now I'm not saying that we're
going to again forget those months and
years before but I think again because
of this uh growing transatlantic Rift
there's going to be greater openness um
provided that China plays well the game
and I think it is playing well the game
to actually look for ways of working
with but let me just inform you that
your China addiction predates jd1 Europe
has a China addiction Which is far older
and you need to fix that irrespective of
who's in the white house and we are in
Bavaria Ambassador uh well Jay and I
used to be neighbors in uh Beijing uh
where we first became friends um I would
just say a couple of things one uh it
was interesting that J D Vance did not
mention China in a speech so process
that one for a moment number two
notwithstanding my vast disagreements uh
with much of what China does and what
they promote uh it's a smart country
yeah and they thrive on a world full of
ambiguity and they do so because there
is zero ambiguity in their National
strategy they know exactly where they're
going and they task and Implement and
execute with Precision so a world of
ambiguity placed to their strengths
which is Shoring up relationships I mean
the the speech uh by wongi who I first
got to know when he was head of the
Taiwan Affairs office uh I I've heard
for 30 years I mean it's it's the same
basic talking points but it's a
reassuring set of points about China's
role in the world and where fair play
Level Playing Field and all of that uh
so China will be a factor in everything
we're talking about they need to be
drawn out in terms of problem solving
around some of the major issues of the
day so let me just take you to the end
point where I can imagine a summit with
Trump and shiin ping and I've heard from
Trump personally uh about his
relationship with shiin ping he thinks
he has a good relationship with shiin
ping likes likes the man so you can
imagine them coming up at least for the
a holding pattern a formulation for
coexistence but you could imagine the
coexistence drawing China into maybe a
Ukraine rebuild scenario or something
like that in other words the US China
relationship has always operated better
when there's been a large strategic
construct to pursue okay keeping us out
of trouble so I imagine that that could
be in our future proti relationship I'm
somewhat optimistic about where that
goes L I agree with um much of what you
just said I think for a country like the
UAE we need a managed detm between China
and the United States in the coming
period both for geopolitical and
geoeconomic reasons I think we need to
avoid the FUSD trap scenario that is
also something that has been a little
bit of a claring call for a number of
countries and analysts recently for us
we're the biggest trading partner to for
China in the Middle East and reexport
hub we're also a big biggest trading
partner for the United States but for us
the United States is an indispensable
strategic partner in the region and we
are always looking for ways to solidify
that partnership and China will always
be an important economic player and
partner and I think we need both for
economic growth which is the buzzword of
uh European reports this month so I
think this is good net net for everybody
I think you know big picture uh if we
can work with the United States and with
China in also increasing the stake they
have at these various tables in terms of
peace and security that would be a good
net outcome for everyone so that's the
position of the UAE and that's how we
see uh the two countries the last point
would be on AI which we've touched on
briefly um was deep seek a spotnik
moment I don't know the tech companies
the United States would say not um but
our investment has been upward of
hundred billion dollar in American AI
because we believe that you know we're
going to be moving from period of
geoeconomics to geotechnology and that
will Define and it should Define in a
good way whether we all continue to
economically Prosper or not so for the
UAE it's about everybody getting access
to that getting access to the data
centers and being able to exponentially
grow that's a target for US minister J
Shanker you have a direct question from
Michael but also maybe on the rest of
what you just heard you know I was kind
of marveling at what I heard so we have
the values based Europe very upset with
trumpan America and because it's upset
guess what they're going to turn to
China so there must be some great value
based connect between Europe and
China don't look at me I mean
look I I mean I I have invested in this
and and then let's let's take this
further so there's this terrible law of
the jungle out there okay we can't we
can't deal with it so let's stay with
the law which we have now what's that
law that game is been gamed by
China so the laws the law abiding the
rule based order the multilateral
institution which all of us by the way
said the China is getting the best out
of it uh and we say oh by the way we
must defend that because the alternative
is
worse so I'm left scratching my head a
bit that a flawed democracy is not not
as good as an efficient authorit
authoritarian regime I think that's the
bottom line stable monarchies I've said
this before stable monchies is we
reverting to that's we getting to conion
of having having said that let me turn
to
Michael uh look let's just reflect
on life since
November okay and it's it's less than a
month of this Administration in office
so think there are another 20 months to
go at
least so what has been the
conversation
Ukraine Gaza Greenland Panama
tariffs and you think the world order
isn't
changing I mean and this is less than a
month in
office but why Greenland I mean sorry
don't ask
me I neither said it not own
it so so the look The the point is that
at the end of the day if there is uh you
know I I think you use the word Samir
about overheads okay I found it very
interesting that the first foreign
policy engagement of this
Administration consciously was the
quot okay what's so nice about the
quad it has no
overheads it's a kind of a it's going
dutch everybody comes pays the
bill and and you know it's it's fair
right so look if we are looking actually
at a different vision of architecture a
different sense of the power of the
United States if there is a you know I
don't know I know uh fat Bol who left
the room was there but some of you may
have been at the earlier JD van speech
in Paris on the AI action Summit or may
have at least read
it you know there is a belief today in
circles which count apparently in the
United States the best that I can make
out that us
creativity uh Power Innovation is
actually hamstrung by its commitments
and relationships abroad that if if
America was really Unbound and allowed
to you know do its fullest uh it would
serve its interest much better you may
disagree with it or not but there is
such a belief and it's a very dominant
belief uh today uh out there so if
that's the belief and if diplomacy is
significantly shaped by overheads if
these are the kind of uh issues which
are being addressed or at least put on
the table fairly early on tell me the
world's not going to
change the point is that you all have to
watch out where you are in the American
diplomatic budget sheet are you in the
overheads or not and I think that will
decide your future uh in the next two
years at least but let me uh first
invite joint secretary raguram to come
and uh close this particular panel Ru
you're here this is the mic for you
thank you very much uh a quick qu of
thanks is in order I guess I would like
to thank honorable president stub who
has to leave us for another engagement
uh and uh Madame Minister uh Ambassador
John Huntsman and uh Dr naali for your
participation and wonderful insights uh
this week has been a very busy one for
Indian diplomacy uh Dr J Shankar was at
two important Sumit level engagements in
France and us uh we are very happy and
glad that he was able to come and
participate thank you very much sir uh I
would like to thank Dr and his team at
ORF for organizing this
uh I would like to thank all of you for
joining us I hope you enjoyed the
conversation and the lunch uh thank you
very much so let me let me let me close
this by making an announcement that some
of you like last year would be joining
us at Rina next month it's the 10th
edition uh the good news of all that is
happening in the world is that when Dr J
Shanker happened to be in Mars few days
ago uh they have uh uh announced a Rina
Mediterranean uh in in Mars itself which
will take place in 2025 I it's been I've
been informed that we have to do it this
year but the idea is that we are betting
on this continent we truly believe that
the India Europe and the Middle East
bridge is going to be the center which
is going to keep us all centered and and
our definition of Mediterranean is from
the Gulf to the Baltic
correct more expensive right so with
that with that new definition and the
new mental map in your minds thank you
so much for joining us and have a good
conference thank you
[Applause]