America Second: How India and South Africa are shaping the new global order | DW News

0:00 Hello and welcome to Newsesk. I'm Melissa Chan and I'm Bes Paner. This week we look at our growing multi-olar world and what we mean by that is a world where the United States of America is diminishing as a superpower. Part of it by choice under President Donald Trump. His idea of America first has been to try to withdraw from international affairs. Here in Europe, we see it with how Trump has made US participation in NATO contingent on his personal satisfaction with the levels of European financial commitments to the military alliance. Or else he suggested Europe is on its own. Well, what happens when countries around the world do just that? Go off on their own and function in a world without the United States. That's why the title of

0:46 our program this week is the end of superpower hegemony, America's second. how India and South Africa are shaping the new global order and to be able to discuss this we have two very special guests in the studio today for the first time I believe right we have DW senior correspondent uh based in India Shalu Yadav Shalu in the red dress there and Diane Hawker DW Southern Africa correspondent welcome to both of you thanks for being in the studio you you're going to see Shalu and Diane through the discussion one person you will not see is poor Pablo Foley Alias who is sitting in the control room Pablo in the control room looking at our chat that is taking place as we talk on YouTube. He'll be engaging with you guys uh trying to respond to

1:33 you all individually and also bringing in some of these questions and comments that you guys will be posting in the chat into this uh discussion and we've already received some uh comments on our uh community post and I can sort of bring some of those into the discussion here and this is just a small selection of the kind of comments that we've had. Let's begin with uh this comment from at Bisma Devanga who says I would prefer to see the US as a partner regardless of how it is at the moment. A strong vote there for the United States. You have another comment from at Dorada Bombina who says very simply Viva bricks that does not involve the United States. Then you also have the comment from a regular

2:18 user at Nille Chhaturvei. Hille who says the days of uniolarity are over. Even American hawks recognize this. It's a world increasingly divided in and confrontational which means everyone needs more allies. Everyone wants the world's largest democracy and the fourth largest economy on their side. It's an interesting use of the word allies. I know that Indian foreign policy doesn't like the use of the word allies but we can discuss that with Shalu. Moving on. And we also have this comment from at Robert Talker 652 who says a multipolar world may just well bring everything back into Kila. You have the EU breaks ASEAN and other small conglomerates that can temporarily coales to meet threats

3:05 by larger more powerful conglomerates. No single country wants to get walked over by another. So just uh uh the wide variety of views that we have when it comes to the subject of multiple polarity and how it plays out in the world that we live in. It's a very smart group of people today. It is a very smart group and it's and it's all and it's different kind of comments. It's going to be an interesting discussion. Looking forward to talking to Diane and Charlie about this. Um so anyhow if you all have more comments uh please put them in the chat. Pablo and myself will try and bring them into the conversation. Of course it's not just your comments that we're looking at. We also we also want your answers and answers to a poll question that we've managed to have I think nearly every week. Some weeks we haven't been able to have a poll question. This week we have a poll question and the poll question that we have for you that

3:52 you can answer in the uh in the YouTube chat is the following. Who among these will most shape the new global order? The options you have are Narendra Modi, Donald Trump, Xiinping, Siril Ram Fosa. the leaders of India, the United States, China and South Africa. If you believe some other leader will be shaping uh the new global order more than these gentlemen here, do write into the chat and we'll try and bring them into the discussion. Yeah, for sure. Okay. So, if you're just joining us, if you were a few minutes late, just a reminder that we're talking about the end of superpower hegemony as in the United States and uh America second is the title we picked. how India and South Africa are shaping the new global order and um just to uh get

4:38 started I want to share a part of a speech uh but delivered by South African president uh Sarah Maposa uh two years ago so you know it's old but I think it sets things up very well so let's have a listen it's a little long but stick with us some countries including our own are being threatened with penalties for pursuing an independent ent foreign policy and for adopting a position of non-alignment. As African countries, we have painful memories of a time when proxy wars were waged on the soils of Africa by foreign

5:23 superpowers. We have not forgotten the terrible, brutal legacy of first having our own continent carved up and colonized by European countries only to find ourselves once more being pawns on a chessboard during the Cold War. We are not going back to that history. We refuse to go back to that period in history as Africans. [Applause] And this I will say it once again today. South Africa has not been and will not

6:10 be drawn into a contest between global powers. So that was South African president there. Um I also want to read uh a a a comment from the Indian foreign minister also known as the minister of external affairs sashankar. He said no question there should be an order. India wants something more revolutionary but which is comfortable and steady but it has to reflect the world as it is now and not as it was post 1945 when the rules were weighted in favor of the west. the treatybased concepts are typical of the old order. The new order is something more flexible. So um very

6:58 interesting statements um suggesting that it's something that frankly many people have felt and understood for quite a long time for a number of years this shift uh in terms of uh the global power dynamics and and just so to provide some guideposts for you guys I want to plan our discussion we're first going to talk about multipolarity more broadly and uh you know then we will talk about India and South Africa's negotiations like with the tariffs and its relationship with the United States because it remains a superpower just a diminished one. Uh and then we will look at India and South Africa's relationships with its neighbors and uh also if there's time talk a little bit about the domestic issues in each country that might be hampering its foreign policy agenda. Uh last week it

7:44 was the BRICS meeting, right? Uh bricks standing for uh Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa. And in recent years we've seen uh let's pull up this map that we have um while I explain. We've seen a buildup of of members to bricks um Egypt, the UAE, Ethiopia, Indonesia, and Iran. And there are more countries attending as observer countries with an intention um of of joining uh membership. Now a little unusual last week was uh Chinese leader Xi Jinping wasn't there. Uh Vladimir Putin wasn't there. Putin couldn't come uh because uh he has an arrest warrant uh from the international criminal court. So, uh I guess um maybe uh this multipolar global

8:30 south alternative to the US-led system not a great start if you're missing Russia or China. Uh but maybe it's an opportunity for South Africa and India. So, I've talked long enough, but I really wanted to set things up a little bit and um so over to the two of you guys. I'd love to get your thoughts just on the BRICS meeting that was the most recent sort of manifestation of the new global south sort of initiative. Yeah. Uh I would say the the the absence of Putin and uh Xi Jinping doesn't necessarily mean there's an absence of those two countries from the from the block. They are kind of the big the big dogs within bricks. Um and I do think that what happens in China and what happens in Russia really does tend to color the kind of talks and the stance

9:18 of bricks on a number of of issues. Um if we look at like the most recent meeting, they was talking about strengthening global south cooperation for more inclusive and sustainable government. Governance, a long name, complicated, but one of the things that they were said to be discussing was also um how to deal with conflicts. And quite notably, BRICS hasn't really come out strongly against the ongoing uh uh uh Russia Ukraine conflict. And that's really because of Russia's kind of stance within that bricks group of countries. They are also talking about a number of other issues like what they call uh reaffirming multilateralism. Um buzzwords I think that we hear quite

10:03 often but in practical terms really opening the door and opening the floor to a lot more people which I think BRICS has tried to be quite active in doing with bringing in these other uh members and even though they've added I think it's five or six different countries then more countries who applied and really wanted to get in. So there is a feeling I think um from the global south as it's often referred to that this is the place to be you know if you if you want to get things done if you want to um kind of grow your economy that's an important aspect but also if you want to um move away from a kind of dependence on the United States and Europe what does South Africa want to get out of bricks and the same question um for you Shàu well I think South Africa's kind of the

10:50 small uh brother within the group of BC bricks countries. It is um the major player on the African continent, one of the largest economies there. But when you look at its economy compared to the other BIRCs countries, it is quite a lot smaller. What it does get is access uh access to markets um access to technologies and there's a lot of kind of like training and exchange programs that take place between South Africa and some of the BRICS countries. For example, we've been having an ongoing energy crisis that seems to have lasted a million years. Um, and one of the things that South Africa's been trying to do is to leverage its bricks partnership to try and improve the energy situation. Um, get new generators in that are needed for uh, hospitals,

11:36 but also to build up uh, newer energy sources by partnerships with China and other members of the BRICS um, um, uh, organization. And I would say for South Africa it's been a bit beneficial. Just some numbers that I I saw before coming in here. In 2017 South Africa did about 23 million euros worth of trade with bricks but by 2022 it almost doubled that to to 39 million. So for our economy it's definitely working out as a good partnership. It's also a bit of a difficult balancing act I would say considering the people and the countries that are within bricks shall come from uh what Diane said you know the younger brother reference that you

12:22 made I think as far as India is concerned we very much want want to be the the big brother of bricks uh and not just of bricks actually you know the leader of global south if you like because um uh you know India doesn't just want to use this platform to say that oh we're going to offer view a sort of alternate worldview of how the world should be given the multipolarity that exists now but also to be able to assert itself as a leader of the global south. I mean you might have noticed that Prime Minister Modi uh when he went to bricks this time he not only went there but he made this long tour where he went to Ghana on the same leg, Namibia, Trinidad, Tobago and Argentina. And I'll take you back to 2023 when uh India hosted G20 and it proposed uh for

13:09 African Union to be a part of uh the big G20 group. That was huge. uh so I think that uh it's in it's in the continuation of the same spirit that India wants to assert itself uh as uh the sort of the leader of the global south but also to be able to keep China in check because it's the you know it's it's the most powerful uh uh you know uh country in this block and China is very explicit that it wants to be leader of the global south. It keeps saying that in its state media. Yeah. Yeah. But India is not stepping back. I would say I think uh in in in what you see in Prime Minister Modi's efforts in the last few years of uh of engaging other GL global south uh countries uh it's pretty much clear that uh there's a lot of posturing there with these small

13:55 steps and I'm not sure uh if China is doing at least if not it's not doing it explicitly. uh we do know China as someone as a country that does a lot of you know like it does uh a lot of work with other countries but it'll do it silently and you know it doesn't want to be all sort of PR about it you know they don't make a big uh deal about it um but yeah I think uh coming back to India's um you know ambitions I think it wants to be able to uh keep China in check through these platforms yeah but then isn't it also a fact that bricks wouldn't bricks if China weren't a part of bricks. The the relevance that bricks has on the global stage and the and the eye that it draws from Donald Trump who was I think recently threatened every BRICS member with a 10%

14:41 random tariff. I don't know if that's actually going to happen or not but then the eye that it invites from Donald Trump is primarily because you have a heavy hitter like China there, right? I mean no no I think China's role within bricks definitely can't be understated at all. Um and I think the different bricks members also deal with each other in different ways. So it's even though they are part of the same club, I would say the interactions with each other also do you know differ. Um as Shalu was mentioning you know from India's perspective I think it's kind of like we want to keep them close so we can know what's going on but we're not really friends. I mean the goals are are divergent sometimes and absolutely and so um br I just want to check in with you because I want to encourage everyone

15:27 to ask questions. We have the you know DW corresp correspondents in the studio it's so rare and to have someone uh you know based in South Africa and also based in India is a rare treat. So please shoot us your questions. Are you seeing any comments and I can see I can see lots of comments but they're not specific to bricks but I'll just bring them in just for consideration just on multiple it is there. I mean for example divorce she's talking about the term global order. She she calls it it being so taboo. She says millions of people will never get on board with this idea even though collectively we need a global order to deal with these things like nukes, climate change etc. Then you also have uh uh somebody else who's who's asking us this is at right more equations who's

16:12 asking how can DW mention superpowers without mentioning the the European Union. Maybe it's something that comes up in our conversation at the moment. We're just on on the bricks part of it just early days in the in the in in the discussion. And another point of view here uh this is from a user at PD55 who is again talking about this this this global order who's saying okay but decentralized global chaos could be worse in an era of universal connectivity. Global cooperation should be the goal. That actually leads perfectly into the next question I wanted to ask you is that uh is there a prevailing foreign policy view in either country where I think there's an assumption even uh when we start

16:58 discussing the decline of a superpower and the rise of multi-olar uh a rise of a multi-olar world that that is inevitably going to be better and I'm curious about what the uh foreign policy community um say about this uh are there defenders in your countries uh of the a US-led system? Are there discussions about the pros and cons of uh the sort of postworld war II system as opposed to the new world we're entering now? Yeah, I think from the South African perspective, there is a view that we should really be associating trading and dealing with as many different countries and trading blocks as possible. Um, one

17:45 thing we hear from the South African government often is that they want to have a a non-alignment stance as mentioned in that in that clip and in their practical application of that is that they they will still continue conversations with China and Russia while at the same time trying to maintain relations with the United States which in recent weeks and months has become much more difficult especially with the announcements of the tariffs that uh kind of embarrassing in the White house it's become much more difficult but I think that's why multi- polarity and multilateralism actually has become more important I mean South Africa trades a lot with the European Union and with the United States it's different products going to each side we're also receiving goods from

18:31 countries like China and if any one of those kind of trading blocks were to suddenly cut ties as a country that is still a relatively developing economy, we you'd have to scramble to try and find new avenues. But if you have some sort of ex existing relations with other players, you can start thinking about where else to send uh your goods. For example, um I recently did a story about citrus producers who were very worried about the tariffs in the US, saying that if they get cut off, they would have about a 10% gap in their market. Um but they quite optimistic about being to being able to redirect some of that produce to the European Union to China

19:16 and even to looking for new markets that they hadn't considered previously because there are some relations in existence already. Yeah. But then just to go to that point, I mean the United States even under the current government is not saying that you shouldn't have relations with other countries, right? I think the United the US argument of government's past was always in this whole ally mode that you need to be an ally of the United States. But then the United States has not made that argument in a long time, right? So nobody's really holding the South Africans back except for the Americans themselves under this government. No, certainly nobody's holding the South Africans back or any of the other countries. But I think that um when you have a country that is very dominant like the US is when you know what's the saying if the US catches a cold you know or sneezes the rest of the world catches

20:01 a cold or something like that we've started seeing that impact you know um a country like Lutu much smaller than South Africa but still in our region has now gone to the extent of declaring a state of um emergency over unemployment because of its dependence on the US. And so you see that if there is a dependence on a particular market, it can have a negative impact. And I think that's why this idea of multipolarity is definitely coming to the four much more. Um and also I think there is a feeling from particularly African countries that we need to set the agenda and not just follow. Absolutely. Shall we? True. Actually uh it's the same in India. I mean there are more and more voices for uh multipolarity and keeping India's interest at heart when you speak

20:47 about foreign policy. The west may be trying all it can to have India take a position on Russia you know similar to theirs but uh India refused to do that. In fact it happens to be I mean they have a very thriving relationship. We buy oil from Russia despite uh you know western sort of uh annoy annoyance at it. uh and I would like to read uh uh a quote from India's external affairs minister who I think is the biggest campaigner for uh multipolarity and India's uh non-aligned sort of stance. uh he g he made this really interesting comment uh last year uh at the Munich Security Conference uh and he was in conversation with former US uh secretary of state Anthony Blinken and foreign minister of Germany Bearbach and this was in the context of the whole bua uh

21:35 over India not taking a position on uh on Russia uh for its aggression in Ukraine and he said why should it be a problem if I'm smart enough to have multiple options you should be admiring me you shouldn't be criticizing me I think it's very important today not to reduce the entire complexity of our world into a very sweeping proposition I think that era is behind us and he looks at Anthony Blinken and says good partner provide choices but smart partners make choices and I think that says everything about India's position yeah but just to it was a very glib I saw that exchange and shanker is a master with words and he comes up with things such as you know Europe needs to get into the get away from the minds said that Europe's problems are the

22:20 world problems but the world's problems are not Europe's problems. So there have been lots of glip talk over there. But then here in lies a bit of a contradiction right in the if the world truly wasn't multipolar India's opinion would not matter. And it is I don't remember a time I don't know if you do sh but I don't remember a time uh in Indian foreign policy that after the outbreak of the the Russia Ukraine war you had streams of diplomats from the west heading down to Delhi in the immediate aftermath of that to try and talk to Delhi about it. So they do definitely see that Delhi has an important role to play and if in in the during times of the cold war that never used to happen remember India was stuck with holding non-aligned movement uh meetings with the first one being in Bandung for example. So it was it it already is

23:07 a different time and just it's interesting that they he was talking about uh the previous government uh the the Biden government because I suspect that with the current Trump administration things are not so smooth because on the one hand there is this threat of 10% tariffs from the BRICS nations and now this this new threat of secondary tariffs 100% tariffs on Russia for any nation that trades with the Russia something that would affect India and China directly. something that Mark Rut the NATO chief was was talking about. So I think it's it's not as secure a footing with the current administration for India as it was with the previous one and I think therefore the liberties that India could take and the amount of walking the fine line that they could do earlier is slightly going to be harder now. But Mishi if I could come in there I I don't

23:54 think that there's a dispute that the relationships have existed for a long time but it's the question definitely from South Africa and other African countries is is the relationship fair um and is there space for um you know Asian countries, South American countries and African countries to actually not only have a seat at the table but for their voices to be heard um in a more meaningful way. So, so I think that's also when we talk about multipolarity, it's not only just being there, but like are you really hearing us at the same level that you hearing, you know, organizations like the European Union? And there has been a feeling on the African continent in particular that that isn't the case. Um, and that there's a need for the opening

24:40 up to also allow African people to start setting the agenda about what's important for people in these regions. you're kind of um touching on and we've been dancing around this which is uh we're talking about multipolarity but there's also the international system that we are operating within and those are actually two different things so engaging with different countries sort of emphasizing a stronger relationship in in your region your respective region but at the end of the uh at the end of the day what I'm hearing is if you want fairness if you want to be heard isn't that something like the United Nations isn't that where you go to file your your sort of uh cases at the World Trade Organization, which is a very broken system right now. There are a lot of international systems that were set up

25:26 in the postw World War II period that was flawed, deeply flawed, but was the way that we've been able to operate for 70 years to the satisfaction of c some countries more so than others. But in this new multipolar world, it sounds like the the only way to function in this multipolar world is still to rely on some set of international systems. as you said at the very beginning of the show, uh nuclear like a sort of a nuclear deal or a control of of uh nuclear so that it doesn't uh nuclear weapons don't um sort of increase uh in terms of stockpiles in the nuclearpowered countries um with trade with the UN international stuff and with health and so my question is where do you think I mean do people policy makers in South Africa and India

26:11 when they think about this who who is going to be running the new international system in their new multipolar world. Um, presumably it is not the Americans. Is there still a need for some kind of big brother to manage the system and often break the rules that they set themselves for everybody else, which has been the problem with the United States? But do we really believe that China can set up a system and not be tempted to break the rules of its own system that it sets up? or is this going to require a group of nations and do you believe that that South Africa or India would have a role in building something like that? It's a big philosophical question, but just throwing that out there because that's the conundrum, right? Actually, it's something to uh to think

26:58 about given the current realities of the world. Um I don't think we necessarily need to see a platform like a bricks as anti America or anti, you know, the rest of the world. uh cuz I we see this as a platform to be heard you know to assert ourselves in the changing realities of you know the the global scheme of things really um so um India doesn't want to see itself in you know trying to like fit in blocks because because it looks good from the American lens or you know from the European lens it pretty much wants to be a shape shifter whether that means that uh it can lead to being a big brother we don't No, I think that's sort of counterintuitive if when you say

27:44 multipolar as well as then look for a big brother for the world. Uh but to be able to find your own place in the you know the messed up world that we see out there with so many uh you know conflicts and differences uh over things. Uh it's a big deal to be able to find a stage where you can be heard and I think they are making themselves heard. Yeah. I mean I think from South Africa's perspective I also don't think they trying to say let's replace one superpower with another superpower and to a certain extent South Africa has been quite supportive of the international institutions uh it's active at the UN um it's got the case that it's taken to the ICJ so it's using the institutions but at the same time it is saying that the institutions are in

28:32 some instances problematic and in some instances broken. So um you know what we've seen for example now with South Africa leading the G20 one of the things that it's put on the agenda is to say that part of the conversation also needs to do a way or find a better way to deal with the very large debt burden that many developing countries have. So it's not to say get rid of the IMF or get rid of the World Bank, but let's make it fairer because how do you expect these countries to develop if they are sitting with massive massive debt burdens often negotiated decades ago but that still haven't been able to be to be cleared and I think that they really are trying to get additional support for that. Um I

29:17 remember um earlier with one of the G20 meetings um you know one of the representatives from France was also speaking about this debt issue and recently there was a conference in Spain where this issue of debt was was was being discussed and it is a hope I know from South Africa that by the end of its G20 presidency there's something more concrete on the table that kind of more services um um you know those in in in on the African continent Asia and South America. Let me just bring in a few things. I mean you were talking about uh uh sharing the debt burden or easing it. There is another issue that somebody else brings up and this is about tackling climate change for example. This is from user Diodata Deshmok who talks about Mr. Modi emphasizing Vasuva Kutumbakam that is Sanskrit for the

30:02 world as one family. How can this inclusive vision help collaborate globally to tackle climate change effectively? If you'd like to take that but that not immediately let me bring something else as well. Uh there is also a comment here from uh Thomas Vodka that's a unique username saying India is already a superpower they have nukes mate so there you go argument over because you have nuclear weapons you are a superpower divorce mentioning that a flexible world order I think this is a starting point and there is one last comment that I wanted to bring in this is from uh user let's be real saying yes we need international systems but without masters we need them to be democratic. No one should be uh uh running the system. And it's a point

30:48 that I think you brought up a little while back. Just a few comments I wanted to sort of throw in there, but maybe you want to look at the climate change issue. Yeah. And just really quickly, I mean, the international system, the United Nations, so much of it is actually funded by the United States with the withdrawal of uh US foreign assistance, especially to the WHO, that organization. I mean, when you talk to people there, they have been gutted. And so it it's not just a we don't want the you know big brother but big brother is financing the international system um to a large extent and there's been some news that the Chinese tried to move in to provide some uh money to the World Health Organization. But frankly when you talk to people in Geneva they're just saying it's simply not enough to plug the hole that the Americans have left. Sorry over

31:33 and it's the same sentiment actually when it comes to climate change. uh um in at the last COP summit um India made a point that look there need to be climate reparations you know we're essentially paying for the sin of the west uh for this mass sort of industrialization and look at what's happening in India there's uh you know there are there are there are floods uh there are you know natural disasters all linked to climate change and they're happening at a pace that we cannot handle so that's also one way uh that India has asserted itself self on a global stage to say that uh this is not entirely our problem and the west the the European nations and uh America should take uh you know part of the burden even though they have their own set of challenges to deal with the

32:18 climate change. Uh but they should uh start by being apologetic about it and then also uh you know uh offering some sort of reparation. Um and you you mentioned an expression there from one of the comments uh there shouldn't be just a few countries running the system. There should be no one running the system. No one running the system. I think what the other nations uh the other emerging economies are doing now, they're hacking the system as it were and some would say about time. I mean just just on that point so or take a step back but before doing that it's interesting that from the Indian point of view for example the point is made over and over again that the the United Nations for example currently is not representative. Back to the point that you were reading about SJ Shanka

33:03 from the text. It needs to represent not the post 1945 reality but the current reality of the world security council and the permanent security council. It's a point that India keeps making it needs to be reformed. It almost sounds like okay if India is a part of that then everything is hunky dory but the way it is now it is not but maybe that's a false interpretation. I just want to take a step back and maybe come to you Diane. Um I mean we're talking about uh it's quite apparent and there's enough articles and analysis on this about China and India competing to represent the voice of the global south. I personally hate the word global the term global south but middle let's just stick with global south for the moment. I mean middle power is also say it's politically incorrect and I get that and I mean it's better than the third world that we grew up with but much more progressive. So so you're talking about leadership of

33:50 uh the global south. If one assumes that leadership is at all required, what does southern Africa or for that matter the African continent believe? Who does it believe represents their voice more with greater heft? China or India? No, that's a tough. You need to make a choice and I'm going to write this down and we're going to we're going to stick this with your Twitter profile. There's only one correct answer. I'm expecting that clock to pop up, but it's like you know who wants to be a million Indian. I I think it's it's difficult to say because I don't think that African countries get the same thing from each of them. So um China has historically been very active on the African continent uh in the mining

34:35 sector um as well as kind of helping with development projects on in different countries. Whereas India I think has started coming in more on the kind of ICT perspective and offering tech relations. to be honest, I think um Africans want to play the field and see what they can can b how they can benefit from all the bricks partners and externally you know um and I think that's that's the whole point about this multilateralism is that why should we choose one over the other if there benefit in a relationship with more than than one even within the BRICS uh countries and I think that is also why there was this almost clamoring when bricks opened up to for other c

35:21 countries to join bricks um bricks has been having this um meeting towards the end of each session where it has the friends of bricks almost that who join and have these discussions about what they need because I think there is a acknowledgement that within the group and outside of the group there certainly are benefits to be had and there isn't a need to choose one. Well, um, this actually segus very well into the relations both countries have with the United States because Donald Trump wants you to choose. I want to play this sound bite u where he was talking about um penalizing the members of BRICS. Let's just have a listen and respond to this. Well, if they're a member of BRICS, they're going to have to pay 10% tariff just for that one thing and they won't

36:06 be a member alone. I thought BRICS was, you know, I said this about a year ago and it largely broke up, but you know, there are a couple that hang around, but I thought it largely broke up. Bricks is not, in my opinion, not a serious threat. But what they're trying to do is destroy the dollar so that another country can take over and be the standard. And we're not going to lose the standard. All right. So, how is that going down in both countries? Well, in India, we're kind of walking a tight rope with US uh because lots has happened in the last few months. Uh not just uh related to tariffs. Of course, uh US is angry about you know bricks grouping up and then there's tariff as

36:52 you heard related to that and then he's threatening tariffs on countries that deal with Russia. India happens to do that a lot. I mean Russia is our biggest uh weapons supplier. we are buying lots of oil from Russia. But that aside, uh just in the last few months, uh I think the relationship uh got worse uh when Trump said time and again that he's the one who brokered peace between India and Pakistan when they almost went to war. It was a warlike situation. It was I think it was uh one of the biggest conflicts that we've seen uh with Pakistan and uh India kept asserting that we did this bilaterally. we brokered peace bilaterally and then Trump would say again that no it was me and at the same time uh when he made

37:38 these statements he kept uh repeating that he's offered a trade deal to both countries almost like a you know lollipop or a or a bait if you like. Uh so that uh hasn't gone down well in India and I think both countries are still sort of recovering from that. Uh there is a delegation who is in US at the moment as we speak trying to iron out the details of the trade deal. Uh the tariffs haven't uh come into effect yet. So we don't know how that's going to uh go down. Lots of uncertainty in the the Trump world in uh in in Trump's America. Uh but um things are very unclear. I think we're we're sort of sitting at a crossroad with America. It's interesting. Sorry Bish that you mentioned the delegation from India

38:24 because South Africa has also tried to do some sort of outreach. Um President Ramaposa went to the white house accompanied by some golfers um and other members of his cabinet in really trying to appease America and calm relations. Some people say that there were some successes in that meeting and others say it was a bit of a disaster because of the way it was handled from the US side. But definitely the relationships um has become quite tense between South Africa and the US and I think with the updated announcement of the tariffs we have now been put at a 30% uh tariff which is something that would be a real concern to a lot of of of South African businesses doing business with the US. Um but at the same time you know the the

39:10 comment there from Donald Trump is a bit um contradictory because he's saying BRIX is not really a threat but they should have 10% tariffs. But why do that if that if he doesn't feel like there's some kind of threat, especially with this discussion about um introducing a different currency within the bricks block? And I know you want to talk about that, but before you do, just just a few just a few comments on America. This is from the community. This is from I'm I'm going to get this username uh incorrect. So, pardon me. DNA geranger. I don't know if I'm doing that right. saying to be America's enemy is dangerous, but to be America's friend is for sure completely fatal. They collapse their own friends. Uh Patriot of Persia pointing out that America is

39:55 $31 trillion in debt. I don't know if that is factually correct, but that is just a comment that we have uh received and uh another user saying Beijing is never shaping the world. It's only Washington and Washington is intending to keep it that way. just to bring in one question, a very specific question from Karolina Vina, one of our regular uh viewers. Hi Karolina. Uh it's a question for you uh particularly u uh Diane I lost the comment saying she's asking with all Trump's obsession on tariffs how do India and South Africa deal with these impositions? Maybe quick answers from you both and then maybe you can go back to the thought you had earlier. On the tariff is issue I would have to say with great difficulty. You know, to be quite honest, South Africa does a lot

40:40 of trade with the US, but it also does a lot of trade with the European Union. And what I have seen, I think, is a bit of a pivot more in the direction of the EU. Shortly after that announcement by um um President Trump, we saw a very hastily organized SAEU summit. Um and the leaders of the EU, you know, arrived in South Africa for this one-day summit. And I think the timing of that was very significant. And the the the talking point or the discussion there was definitely we need to keep this partnership going. We need to make sure that we live in a multilateral world. Um there was also discussion about how we share similar values and support democracy. And I think that that was definitely an effort to to say we we can continue to work with the US but we have other friends and we have other powerful

41:26 friends who we are prepared to do business with from the South African perspective. Um I was just going to go back to a comment that you said at the very beginning of our discussion where you described that Oval Office meeting um being humiliating and and as an American I would actually say that it depends that humility humiliation can apply to to to both leaders like you can see it as a humiliation of the South African president but actually it's also humiliating as an American to see a US president treat another world leader that way. So it's it's just a very meeting was also described as an ambush in some quarters. Yes, definitely. It was I think the commentary from South Africa was definitely that it was an ambush and that's why there was this feeling that maybe uh you know the delegation did well to try and keep things calm and not escalate. There was a feeling in some

42:11 sectors that uh Ramaporosa should have pushed back more um and and being more firm about what the true situation was and that um you know he was being too diplomatic in a way. Um but I suppose that's that's how diplomacy is. you you have to try and play a long game. You know, we have a four more years of this Trump presidency or three and a half more years of this Trump presidency and certainly South Africa doesn't want to burn down the entire relationship in the first portion knowing that it still needs to continue and maybe later on there would be an opportunity to improve things while simultaneously making sure that we keep other friends in other quarters um who we can turn to if if the relationship completely sour.

42:57 Can I just throw in something philosophical here? Sorry. It's about I mean we talking about multiparity and middle powers and everything. Uh isn't this where the real politic of life comes in? I mean I think the the Indian foreign policy establishment keeps talking about when it comes to the west is like you have your values, we have our interests. If that be the case, no matter whether Donald Trump is in office in the United States or not, the United States is set to remain the world's largest market. So no matter who's sitting in the White House, you have to trade with the United States. And I don't know how you see this as an American or as an analyst who can look at American politics, but there seems to have been a sea change in American politics as well. This is not a blip that is going to disappear. There seems to be a sea change in American politics. So over the longer term, you will have to have a relationship with America

43:42 whether you like it or not in terms of trade. Absolutely. I mean, uh, let's talk about ddollarization a little bit. I know neither of you guys are business reporters, but it is something that of course is is what Donald Trump perceives bricks as trying to do. Um, and what let me just provide a little bit of my own reporting and input. Um, I've spoken to people who work in the global finance world. Um, essentially trying to see where they can park money to make the money grow, whether it's in a stock market or in a foreign currency exchange market. And the problem is that the United States is not particularly appealing right now. Um, and we see that with the drop of its currency against the euro, uh, almost 10% at one point. Um but on the other hand there are no other alternatives. Uh the reming be the

44:27 UN that people would would would think um is is problematic on the foreign currency exchange market because it is not easily convertible. The Chinese do not want to let go of control of that and they never will and so there is no viable alternative. We see Russia buying energy um uh oil from from Russia and they've tried to do some of it uh with payments with both the Chinese rem and also uh rupes I believe um and it's just what you do with that cash becomes a real problem. They're stuck. Um so dd dollararization a lot of like the you know the economists the wonks will say oh that's a nice fantasy it's not really happening. So my question to both of you guys is first of all what you think about that but also what is the conversation in your countries? Do people really believe this could happen

45:13 and more importantly do the policy makers the the economists in your country think this is something to seriously pursue? You want to you want to take it? Sure. Uh well I I I it doesn't look like from an Indian uh point of view that uh India is seriously looking at ditching the dollar cuz uh it's easier said than done. Uh as far as India is concerned, it's more uh concerned about China's attempt uh so-called attempts to uh uh you know propagate its own currency around the world. So uh India has sort of uh said it in in uh in in said it indirectly that we are not uh for ddollarizing in that sense. So um yeah I think they are more concerned about what China does with its uh currency.

46:00 I think from South Africa there's also like a similar apprehension about it. um it's kind of spoken about at at at bricks meetings but what's notable I think is that between the big meetings you don't see any movement on getting there I mean I attended last year's bricks meeting it was mentioned I think two years back they've got a finance committee that's set up but it's not happening so I don't think that within bricks there's clarity on for example which currency to use because you could use one of the bricks currencies But do you take China's currency, South Africa's currency, India's currency? Whoever's currency is taken ends up being kind of having a more powerful position within bricks and that's in a

46:47 way anti-bricks because they've said that we are all partners. We are all equal in this in this organization. So immediately handing one of the partners extra power would be not I don't think that they want to do that. and bringing in a third currency that's from outside that also makes it complicated. Whose currency do you take? I think these are the factors that are really slowing this movement. Um but I do think that um for bricks talking about it kind of helps with um creating an impression that something is happening because every in every bricks event they'll have it in the statement but they'll never say how close they are to finalizing it but it's happening it's happening. You know, I would also like

47:33 to add some trivia to this cuz uh it uh this whole idea of ddollarization and bricks coming up with its own uh currency, it plays into the domestic uh sort of national nationalistic sentiment in India. I mean you see on social media some of these uh videos doing the rounds where u um um I don't know how to say this in in a very politically correct way but uh there are these videos where uh uh the foreigners are queuing up to get Indian currency at like you know how we go and get visas for India those videos as well and they're they're they're queuing up for uh you know to get visas for India that's another story that the place of Indian passport has fallen uh in the indexes. So uh I think

48:20 uh on a global stage yes it's not uh India's official position that it's uh going to ditch the dollar but domestically uh you know when you throw these kind of things up in the air it helps the political parties and locally I imagine I mean not the monetary policy wonk at the top of the government but like for um for for everyone else I I imagine stuff like crypto is also partly fueled by a desire to just not depend on the dollar. Yeah, that's that's a thought of mine I've had over the years and it's a little bit uh tangential to what we're talking about, but I think to see a lot of that we were we talking about bricks for some time. I wanted to bring in another multilateral organization, the SEO. And the reason I wanted to bring in the SEO, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization is basically to ask this question um is it

49:08 is it the what is the thinking in India? Is it to be a part of as many multilateral organizations as possible because India believes in multilateralism because it ties in directly with multipolarity and hence moves away from the alliancebased system the western oriented system is that the idea and if that's the case does India think that it's being successful in organizations such as that such as bricks and the SEO which have both Russia and China heavy hitters again uh so there are two parts to this uh question I'll address the uh the first part uh which is is India trying to be a part of as many uh but there's another way of looking at it is um so I'll give you a bit of historical context um there's something called the non-alignment movement that started in

49:54 India during the cold war which allowed us to uh you know have good relationships with both the blocks the Russians and the and the Americans and India is very much sort of carrying on in the same spirit now whether it means that we are becoming a part of you know many blocks uh so to say uh that's one way of looking at it but uh another way of looking at it is that India is uh is now more assertive at putting its own interest at the center of uh its policies uh uh when it comes to that um and the second question was uh whether it's successful or not um that's something that has generated a bit of a debate uh in India because uh some people would see this as a very good sign uh for future of India on on a

50:40 global platform and they give Prime Minister Modi a lot of credit for that. Uh but then the taste of the pudding is uh in the in in Yeah. And so uh I give you a recent example when we had this big uh conflict with Pakistan. Um Indians were watching very keenly as to what the world leaders have to say about it. Are they are they batting for India as opposed to Pakistan? you know, are they really getting behind us, you know, in support for our actions uh against terrorism? And so they send these uh delegations uh you know, of uh MPs from both opposition parties and ruling parties around the world uh to make that case. And uh it's still debatable how far they got uh how how successful or not uh they were in getting that message

51:27 across. And what does that tell you about your position in the world? But at the same time, India refused to sign the SEO joint declaration recently last month because uh it didn't talk about uh because it it didn't talk about Pakistan's um actions. It was something to do with it didn't take a position on uh the the terror attack uh that India wanted uh you know to be there in the joint declaration. Um so it's it's um it's contested uh it's contested uh you know whether or not India has got there but um it's debatable uh and it's it's a hard question to answer. Uh but there are both sides to it. Uh some uh analysts have been really critical of this approach that uh I mean what are

52:13 you trying to do? You know you're you're everywhere. you're you're making all these uh you know foreign trips as prime minister uh and when it's in the need of the hour the the in the hour of the need uh u none of the big leaders have taken a clear position on the India Pakistan conflict. So there's there's both sides to it. We pride ourselves on news desk of of asking all the hard questions and some philosophical ones every now and then. Yeah to that. No no absolutely. I mean, I think that segus really well into what I want to cover for the last bit, which is um, you know, how both countries deal with its foreign policy with its regional neighbors. Um, because people do tend to think of South Africa as the leader of the continent. Oo, what might other countries think about that? And and and

53:00 same thing with India. Uh, India, it's a much harder and less clear picture. You have Japan, you have South Korea further uh along, but also Pakistan and China are are two countries that it is often at loggerheads with to put it delicately and so um saying that it is going to be the leader uh in the region is probably uh too high of an ask. So I want to ask both of you about the the challenges and the goals uh for the country's uh leaders for what they want to do with their neighbors. Yeah, I I think being a leader on the on the continent comes with its challenges and advantages and disadvantages. Uh definitely South Africa is a leading economy on the continent. Um and uh you know Nigeria

53:46 and Egypt are also up there but over time I think South Africa has held the that position for for longer and it's allowed it a lot of opportunities to be in conversations at a global level and also in a way to put other issues on the table. Um for example, South Africa is the only African country in the um G20 um and has the G20 presidency now and it will well it it was instrumental along with India in bringing the African Union in as a G20 member as well. So that that's you know very been very positive because it's kind of trying to say we as South Africa are not only working for ourselves as a country but we working

54:31 for the continent by bringing in other other other members and making sure that the AU is there and being able to bring continental issues to the table. Um, but I think, you know, there are always going to be some conflicts between what is best for the country and what's best for the continent and where you put more of your energy and and effort and balancing that. Uh, that's definitely been one of the things we've seen with the with the the G20 like do do you just focus on what's really important to the South African public or do you start looking at a at a bigger level at like the the continental issues? But I think South Africa does try also to be quite um involved in things like negotiations

55:16 on the continent and it's lent some credibility to its its role as a continental leader. It was also lent some troops a large number of troops to assisting Mosmbique for example um in the the conflict in the capital Gardo region was also in the DRC as part of that joint force. So I think that is helpful in that it's not only speaking like a leader but it's putting its resources in there. Um not everybody agrees that it should be. Um of course even in South Africa there were questions about why are we sending South African soldiers to the DRC or to Mosmbique. That's not our conflict. Why are we getting involved in that? Um but I think particularly under the Ramaposa administration, the view is that um

56:03 being involved in in bringing peace and and being involved in in assisting with continental issues does more good than it does bad for for us as a country. I just want to sort of come in because there's lots of comments about South Africa that we are getting in the in the chat and they're not all very nice, but I will bring some in because people have been posting. U so you have uh Sean Levenson saying South Africa can't even keep the power on. Good luck with that superpower. And another user Chameleon saying South Africa can't keep the electricity on. Then there is another user Lincoln Lugard who's saying South Africa that's so funny. Ask any ordinary South African and they would be shocked to hear that South Africa is charting its own path on the global stage when

56:48 it's such a mess internally. I suppose alluding to you need to be strong internally to be able to focus on the external world. Maybe you have a comment on that. One comment also about India. If only I had a nickel for every time the media has tried to convince us that India is going to be a superpower. That's from user Montag. Just a quick disclaimer there. We're not trying to convince you that India is a superpower. We're just trying to have a discussion about what the talk is. So who wants to go first? Do you want to talk about South Africa? Well, first of all, I'll talk about the power. It's real. Yeah, we should mix the domestic challenges with the regional challenges. I I mean the power issues are are real. You we every South African has got their backup kit. You have lights. You have uh you know internet battery charges and everybody's kind of on standby for what

57:34 we call load shedding which is when the we have rolling blackout also load shedding. Yeah. Absolutely. Um 24-hour power cuts. But I think it's important to to say that you know there is domestic there are domestic issues and domestic policy and every country has um external international relations policies and agendas. Um that's why we have different government departments. So the people responsible for dealing with the power outages are not the same people responsible for dealing with international trade or even international relations. Um and you might find that uh South Africa is more successful on one than the other, but they can be interconnected in some ways. So for example, with the power issue, I

58:20 think that South Africa has tried to lean on its relationship with with China in particular to help it resolve some of those power issues. At the last um uh bricks conference that was held in South Africa, it was in the peak of load shedding and soon after that there was an announcement to say we're getting generators for many of the hospitals affected by load shedding from China and that that was a kind of a direct outcome of behindthe-scenes conversations. That's not to say that you know everything is working well. There are a lot of issues. Um but I think that in the in the bigger scheme of things you can have your domestic issues while still trying to uh achieve certain international outcomes that may also benefit internally and then they may not

59:07 you know yes I think it's important to uh have this conversation that we are having but uh at the same uh at the same time I think it's important to have a reality check as well of what's happening internally now uh as far as India is concerned concern. There are huge amount of concerns uh about human rights, about minority rights, about whether the country is uh reeling to you know leaning towards an authoritarian uh regime so to say. Uh the press freedom uh index is not looking good. I mean India's place on press freedom index has really sharply fallen in the last 10 years. Uh the infrastructure uh uh is is is the most sort of like latest conversation. It seems to be crumbling. I mean infrastructure is is one of the biggest sort of like driving force of a of a rising economy if you like and uh

59:54 but recently we've been seeing lots of instances of uh you know bridges uh just collapsing uh roads caving in and these are uh you know really expensive projects and they are crumbling within months of uh you know the contractors having uh you know thrown it open to the public. So uh it's raising a lot of questions about uh corruption uh about uh you know whether uh the Indian government is being complacent uh when it comes to you know giving uh the the dream that India deserves uh you know the uh the growth that India uh is known for uh should also uh reflect in all forms uh on the ground. Any comments from um the chat? I just wanted to come in on this on the the infrastructure issue. Okay.

1:00:40 And I think that's also something where there's a big similarity between South Africa and India is that there is a there are a lot of infrastructure issues um in South Africa as well. Um unemployment is a major major concern um in the country and I think with a lot of young South Africans there is a lot of concern that the government isn't doing enough to deal with these domestic issues to create a space where there are there are jobs. On the flip side of that, I do think that South Africa is hoping that um it can kind of attract big foreign players to South Africa in a way to help with that. So what we do see a lot is this idea that South Africa is the gateway to the rest of the continent. Um but South Africa also sees itself as if we can get um enough big

1:01:28 players into the country, we can begin to solve some of these issues. And and I mean I don't think they get it right all of the time, but we definitely do see large um um firms operating from South Africa, companies like Ford, companies like BMW's got a massive plant in South Africa. Um its tech um its IT department that services the rest of the world is based in South Africa. And so those are some positive outcomes I think of keeping these kind of relationships open. um it needs to expand that obviously to make a real dent when it comes to the unemployment and also make sure that the the money that's coming in goes in the right direction because we also have an issue of you know we see foreign direct investment we see taxes

1:02:15 being paid and the money never reaches communities and never reaches the place where it needs to and that's really something that concerns every South African you know the corruption is is a major major problem I mean infrastructure is such an interesting indicator of a country's ability to actually be um the state of the country and and and it's actually directly connected to the global economy and trade. You can have a factory with low labor costs. Uh but if it's really hard to get uh the the the finished goods, the manufactured goods um onto a road, onto a train, onto a rig, on out to a port, um that is the problem. And that has been China's sort of superpower over the last 20 years is that it as an authoritarian system, they'll come in, they'll offer Ford and say, "You build a

1:03:00 factory here. It's very far away from Beijing. It's very far away from Shanghai, but we're going to build these new roads." I mean, it's incredible how cement is important in all of this, right? Um and and we actually see it in the United States as well. The failure

…