 show mapping fault lines where we discuss major geopolitical issues from around the world. Now, this week, all eyes are on Europe as a host of meetings are taking place are scheduled to take place over the next few days. We have the g7 meeting or the meeting of the g7 leaders which is taking place in Cornwall in the United Kingdom. We have the NATO summit, which is taking place in Brussels on Monday. And on 16th, we have the much anticipated summit between US President Joe Biden and Russian President Lannaby Putin. Each of these summits, of course, having a slightly different set of agenda items to discuss, but they're also very closely interconnected. We have with us Praveer Purkayasar to talk about this. Praveer, there's going to be a lot of discussion about some of the micro items. For instance, the g7 countries are planning to commit one billion doses of vaccine vaccines and donations. We'll come to that later. But first of all, I want to take the larger picture with all these three summits. There's also the US Q summit in between on Tuesday. So we have about four or five of these meetings. So how do we see these meetings being held together in some ways in the culmination towards the Putin Biden meeting? What are the various strategic equations that are being worked on? Well, I think there are two larger agenda items before Biden in all these summits. One is to how to rally the European Union and the NATO countries behind him. Now that the disruptive role of Trump is no longer there, who tried to get, I would say, essentially protection money from his NATO allies. We are protecting who give us more money, the typical mafia philosophy. Biden has this old strategy, strategic lineup that we are in this together. Of course, you know, we have our demands from you, but you are with us in this larger battle. And don't go with China economically or try and build relations with Russia independently or what we tell you. So essentially, essentially asking European Union to play its vessel role, which it has for the last 30, 40 years. It has really played not an independent role, but a vessel role and continue to play that because it now seems to be wanting to strike some independent equations economically with Russia and China, because European Union is a part, though a small part of the Eurasian landmarks. So does its future lie across the Atlantic, or does its future lie with the Eurasian landmarks is a long term question that the European powers need to answer. As of now, the answer seems to be more that they will be not as much as UK being the lapdog of the United States. These are my words, but what we said pet poodle, these are the words which are commonly used for the United Kingdom, but the European Union also played a somewhat similar role with some noises here and there. And in the later they have played a completely subservient role. In this also we need to think of that it's no longer just about Russia and China and European Union. It's not just in Eastern Europe, which is, which is aligned much more closely with the European Union and NATO, then with Russia or China, but there's also the Central Asian republics, which have come into existence, part of Soviet Union, and they are all in play. And the minute you come to Central Asia, you get also two other players who are not being seen in this context. Turkey and Eddogan therefore becomes an important player, and you will see that by is planning to meet with Eddogan on the, you know, along with the NATO discussions, the separate meeting that plan with Eddogan is also had a telephonic long conversation with them. And you also see that the China Belt Road Initiative is also playing its role in Central Asia, but there is also the Iran angle. So part of Turkey, the other player in Central Asia is Iran. That's not so visible to people, but Iran has a long history with Central Asia, and therefore to think that Iran is not a part of the Central Asian mix would be a problem. Another thing that India has is when you talk about the US pivot to Asia. Now, one part of the pivot is what US calls Indo-Pacific, which is the ocean. Now, this is really more about Southeast Asia than about the oceans, as you know, oceans have ships, they don't have people. So they don't produce economically. They control the land mass, which they might then threaten. So if you look at that, that India doesn't have too much that it has, it can put into play in Southeast Asia. India's role is limited to being a part of Quad and bolstering the American presence, so to say, over there. And even when Britain sends its warships or France sends its warships, they appear to be far more colonial past than an independent national players in this region. The second problem is that when you look at Central Asia, even there it has very little to play with, because the only pieces on the table that India could have thought was its relationship with Iran or his relationship with Afghanistan. And both do not seem to be going very well at the moment, particularly in Afghanistan with the Taliban coming back and Iran because of the way it has dealt with Iran under US pressure. India seems to be squeezed out of the equation, but Iran and Turkey are very much players there. So I think we are, as the Chinese problem says, we are in interesting times because all this is now up for play. I've been in this context wanted to quickly ask you about the Putin-Biden summit, which is, which the US is maybe trying to portray as just one of the summits, but it's really probably at the heart of all these meetings. So we are, there's been a period of rising tension, there's the relations are not very great. The ambassadors of both countries are not even, I have been recalled, they're at home for consultations. And we have been seeing Biden, Biden and various people's administration parroting the same narrative of Putin being Russians being aggressors, attackers of democracy, a threat to, you know, global society everywhere. So do we see the possibility of any de-escalation or any kind of, say, rapprochement or something of that sort, especially considering that nuclear talks for instance are very significant in the next few years they need to pick up, or do we see this tension continue? I think there is an issue of tension which will always be there. Let's not forget, during the Cold War, the Americans and the Soviet Union were definitely at longer heads. There's no question about that, but they still had the borders with India for the top future. What has happened lately is the communications have really broken down. And under Trump, it had particularly broken down, and let's face it, it had broken down because of people like Biden's pressure on Trump, not to talk with Russia, because if we talk to Putin, he becomes a Putin spooler. So now all those kind of things limited from the liberability completely on the issue of Russia. So now that Biden is in the helm, now they need to do a reset to at least have a way of talking to Russia, not talking to a major military power in the region, is essentially bringing threats of war. And this is not a minor war, it's a war between two countries who have the ability to destroy the globe, 5, 10, 20 times over. So given that threat, that they still need to talk and build some equation with Russia so that it doesn't spill over unintentionally into war. And if you have people who are there and I'm sure in all militaries, who always would take a military option over talking to politically and resolving the issues, I think any of these issues like Ukraine or Belarus or any of the others can spill over unintentionally into a military standoff, which I'm sure neither side wants. So Biden needs to work out a way to talk to Putin. So in spite of differences being able to talk is something they need to have. Now behind the rhetoric of all of this is also stands the fact that the United States was losing its NATO NATO allies, and the European Union could possibly build independent relations with Russia and China. I think that is also one of the objectives that Biden has in this, to solidify them behind him, and the sanctions of Russia, which he has extended with the European Union has extended sanctions of Belarus as we have discussed earlier, that what Belarus has done, that all the European and American powers have done, Israel has done, the United States has done. So the fact that all of this they have done, but the thing Belarus doing it is unacceptable. Also, there is an extension of their so-called rule based world order, which is not as per international law, but as the rule set by G7. So it's a really an attempt at new imperial G7 role, which we are seeing, which was there for a long period, held in check by of course the Soviet Union and the socialist bloc at that point of time doesn't exist anymore. So I think reconfiguring that is also the attempt that Biden has, that he has to take into account that Russia cannot be treated like a small Baltic state or a small East European country. Given that, that he needs to have both his NATO allies on board, Turkey is a problem over there to have the NATO allies on board and also has to have a solidity in the European Union vis-à-vis the economic war that the United States is waging on China. I think that's the other axis of this Biden visit that he has to also look at how to mend some bridges with Turkey because as you know, he has Greece on one side, all the European allies on one side and Turkey on the other side, but Turkey is a big player and Turkey has a big player. If for instance, United States wants to use the Uyghur issue, because that's also where Turkey is in play. There are all Turkmenic tribes to speak the Turkmenic language, Turkey has a lot of cultural influence over that region. So I think that that is also part of this visit. But there is an European Union China axis and the Belt Road axis as well, which I think is other part of it. Finally, that was the last question I wanted to come to which is regarding the issues around China as well, because China of course has been promoting a very strong economic agenda, a process of engagement based on that. And the United States has not really in any sense meaningfully been able to counter it and so has been resorting to in the past sanctions. Recently they withdrew the ban on TikTok but nonetheless came out with some strange regulations regarding the tech sector in China. So we're still seeing a very strong mode of confrontation over there. So is it likely that the European powers will continue to stand by the US on this or will they realize the larger benefits that come from something like the BRM? Well, the European Union has all even with Russia taking the position that they will not follow 100% what the United States is telling them. So the Nord Stream was the bone of contention. Finally, the US is given on given in on that and accepted that having European West European particularly Germany's gas dependence on Ukraine. That's the really the key issue is not something which is the interest of Germany. So it was not so much Russia, which was the issue, but how much veto Ukraine could use on the transit of gas from Ukraine into Germany and other countries in Europe. That was really the issue which was in the heart of Nord Stream. So I think that the battle economic battle that you are talking about is not going to be as simple as a strategic one strategically European Union will go with the United States, these are the both Russia and China. But on the economic issues, they are still, I think, are going to look after their economic interest with as much circumspection as they can because they don't want to annoy the United States beyond the point. And why is that because the United States has the power of sanctions on any country, any company irrespective of what those countries national laws are. They think that their national laws US national laws will work on any company and any country, particularly in its sphere of influence, which is what the European Union is. So I don't see European Union taking United States head on either on China or on Russia. But I do see that they would not like to abandon their economic links with Russia or China, because after all as we discussed earlier that they are a part of the European landmass, unless they want to secede physically, which geographically is going to be difficult. I don't see how they can keep themselves out of any economic relationship, because the Belt Road initiative exists. There are huge number of goods being exchanged between for instance Germany and China, using the Belt Road, the rail system. In fact, it is now an effective freight route that has been established. So there is that issue that there is a direct marketing that Germany and other European countries are doing to China, as well as buying from China. And it is not that China is supplying them with food grains, or it's supplying them with raw materials. Both sides are actually selling advanced goods. So both China is selling them advanced goods, so is Germany. So it's something given the size of the Chinese economy. And this is increasingly clear to the world that the pandemic has actually made China's economic strength even more. So given that, that it's likely that by 2030 China is going to be a bigger economic power than the United States. This is completely different from what existed post Second World War, but the United States have 50% of the production capacity of the world. So given that, I don't see how the European Union, while towing the American line, will not also play footsie with Russia and China, both. And China is here the much bigger player, because its economy is much bigger than Russia's. And it also makes a variety of goods, unlike Russia, which has been at the moment more a supplier of raw materials, hydrocarbons to European Union and food, other food items and so on. Given that I think the China angle economically is the much the bigger one. And I do not see that European Union completely going with the United States on that. Yes, they are doing things which by which they're damaging their economic relationship with China, the recent sanctions on Chinese on number of counts towing the American line, probably on the virus issues, a lot of those things will be there. But nevertheless, I think the European Union will not line up completely behind the United States on that. So we are likely to see a more, more flexible response by the European Union on the issue of China and economy. And as we have seen with the Nord Stream and Russia, while on military part they would line up I think far more closely with the Americans. Thank you so much for being talking to us. That's all your time for today. Keep watching this.