YouTube Transcript:
Jaishankar_ Stubb_ Huntsman_ Nusseibeh_ Tocci on Geopolitical Shifts in 2025
Skip watching entire videos - get the full transcript, search for keywords, and copy with one click.
Share:
Video Transcript
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]
Share:
Paste YouTube URL
Enter any YouTube video link to get the full transcript
Transcript Extraction Form
How It Works
Copy YouTube Link
Grab any YouTube video URL from your browser
Paste & Extract
Paste the URL and we'll fetch the transcript
Use the Text
Search, copy, or save the transcript
Why you need YouTube Transcript?
Extract value from videos without watching every second - save time and work smarter
YouTube videos contain valuable information for learning and entertainment, but watching entire videos is time-consuming. This transcript tool helps you quickly access, search, and repurpose video content in text format.
For Note Takers
- Copy text directly into your study notes
- Get podcast transcripts for better retention
- Translate content to your native language
For Content Creators
- Create blog posts from video content
- Extract quotes for social media posts
- Add SEO-rich descriptions to videos
With AI Tools
- Generate concise summaries instantly
- Create quiz questions from content
- Extract key information automatically
Creative Ways to Use YouTube Transcripts
For Learning & Research
- Generate study guides from educational videos
- Extract key points from lectures and tutorials
- Ask AI tools specific questions about video content
For Content Creation
- Create engaging infographics from video content
- Extract quotes for newsletters and email campaigns
- Create shareable memes using memorable quotes
Power Up with AI Integration
Combine YouTube transcripts with AI tools like ChatGPT for powerful content analysis and creation:
Frequently Asked Questions
Is this tool really free?
Yes! YouTubeToText is completely free. No hidden fees, no registration needed, and no credit card required.
Can I translate the transcript to other languages?
Absolutely! You can translate subtitles to over 125 languages. After generating the transcript, simply select your desired language from the options.
Is there a limit to video length?
Nope, you can transcribe videos of any length - from short clips to multi-hour lectures.
How do I use the transcript with AI tools?
Simply use the one-click copy button to copy the transcript, then paste it into ChatGPT or your favorite AI tool. Ask the AI to summarize content, extract key points, or create notes.
Timestamp Navigation
Soon you'll be able to click any part of the transcript to jump to that exact moment in the video.
Have a feature suggestion? Let me know!Get Our Chrome Extension
Get transcripts instantly without leaving YouTube. Install our Chrome extension for one-click access to any video's transcript directly on the watch page.