 Hello and welcome to NewsClick. Today we are going to have again a follow-up discussions with Siddharth Roy, who is in Bali, on what is happening in G-20. Siddharth, lots of things I am sure that you are hearing. But to follow up on the earlier conversations we have had, we now have this whole question of a missile attack in Poland and the argument that it is a Russian-made missile. As we all know, the S-300 is common to both Poland, it is common to Ukraine, it is common to Russia. And Ukraine has made a lot of missiles earlier because it was a part of Russia, Soviet Union. Is there any traction to this claim that Russia has attacked Poland? It just isn't flying to be honest, to be quite forthright about it. This claim that this was a Russian-launched missile that landed in a Polish village is just not flying. It is not what you just mentioned that Ukrainian make the same missiles and material that the Russians do is well-known everywhere, well-documented, well-known. And secondly, the very reactions from the G-20 leaders is worth noting here. None other than Erdogan, in his press conference today at the G-20, in clear words said, I don't see any Russian involvement in this. Now, he is not an outsider in any sense, he is not in India, he is not the BRICS nations, nothing like that. He is literally a member of the NATO and he has simply refused to entertain this theory. Not only that, his presser actually got a little heated, I'm not sure that will actually be shown anywhere. But he quite in a very sharp review, you know, Chasta is this American journalist for asking bogus and leading questions. The sense that has quite clearly come out at this time is that Zelensky and his ilk, they are literally trying to sell something which no one wants to buy and the misinformation, the sheer volume of misinformation, note how we spoke about this since the very beginning of G-20, whether it was the claim of a horde of missile attacks happening during the G-20, that's not materialized. The claim that Putin was going to be assassinated and that's why he didn't come, no confirmation of that. Lavrov was ill and hospitalized, no real confirmation of that. I have gone out and asked which hospital was it and there was no response. So, claim after claim after claim is just falling flat. Secondly, we saw that right after the news came out, allegedly speaking confidentially, Intel operatives from the US government have told AP, their own agency, that there is no substance to this claim. We know how these leaks of the US government and military Intel setup work really. So, it is quite clear that nobody is buying that theory. Nobody is willing to, and I repeat, start a war that the world doesn't need and the US taxpayers cannot afford. It's interesting, President Biden also seems to have endorsed that this does not appear to be a Russian attack and the AP report that you talked about says that, in fact, they have quoted three independent sources saying the trajectory makes it clear that it was an anti-missile launch probably from Ukraine to stop Russian missiles that landed in a Polish border village. This is the scenario, eminently believable because if Russia has to hit, why should it hit a Polish village on the border of Ukraine if it had to hit Poland at all? So, that sort of makes sense and Polish village is not on the border, is not anywhere near any target that Russia would actually choose. So, on both these counts, even President Biden has come out saying, no, we don't want a war on this. It doesn't seem to be an attack on Poland. I think that's something which is welcome probably in the context that Zelensky would like to ratchet up this and see whether he can create a little more of war hysteria around Ukraine. So, it seems to be that game plan for the Americans was isolate Russia, but not to go to a war with Russia immediately or probably not at all, just make them pariahs, international, you know, isolate them completely. That seems to be their attempt, but what you are saying is that even that's not working. Absolutely not. And as far as the war is concerned, probably what's the next step? I mean, what is the next obvious step that Zelensky is asking for, draw in Poland into the war, like start the next World War III? Nobody is ready for that. Absolutely nobody with half a brain, no matter what degree of a hawk or a warmonger they are. Nobody wants to start a global war between really, really armed to the teeth nuclear powers. So Zelensky is really rather lonely at this moment in his attempt to relentlessly ratchet up war hysteria. But the larger agenda isolate Russia still stays and that's very much visible both in G20 and the United Nations. That is very much there. Yes. And in fact, you see this is something like, this is exactly a case of the American establishment, especially the Democratic Party. They let lose this Neo-Makartheid Russophobic Information Warfare in 2016. Initially, they used it for shaming Trump, hiding the massive electoral failure of Clinton, and they succeeded to a large extent. This has been a gift for the Democratic Party, which just went on giving and giving, and then it easily extended itself first into the Syrian standoffs and the Syrian wars, and then for the Ukrainian phenomenon. But now the problem is that the Russophobic stands that anything claimed against Russia can be passed off as reported, verified news, anything which is even meekly a questioning of that, let alone defense of Russia. Nobody is going there to defend Russia, but even if we were to so much as to claim that there are discontinuities in the story that Russia is culpable for all the possible evils of the USA, such a person or an outlet would be branded a traitor. Now what has happened is that since this was such a fabulous psychop, such a fabulous information warfare tool that it kept on rolling and rolling. But now it's kind of a reductive and absurdum that you cannot under any sense of rational structure of thinking go on with this narrative. So what's happening now is that a section of the American powers, a section of the Western powers is trying to tame a beast which they have let loose. And here I would like to mention again how the CIA just conducted a very high level meeting with the FSB and said it in as many words in the press. I mean, they didn't need to really say it if it was of no consequence. This is a return to the time when, if we all recall, there was disagreement inside the Pentagon itself about going to war. And it was only the Democratic Party establishment led corporate media sections which completely pooped that cautionary word and went ahead with unbridled Russophobic agenda. And that's just coming home to Roost now. Yeah, I think the things that I think you also talked about your interaction with the American press in the briefing regarding what the Americans believe and what other parts of the world seem to hold. It's also clear that most of the world is not a part of the US sanctions. US-led sanctions which the European Union is and Japan are quite tamely following. President Biden said, ruble will become rubble. These are his exact words. But that has not happened. Russia is very much more than just a supplier of gas and oil. It's a much bigger economy than that. And so all of this means that the idea that Russia will crumble with the financial sanctions if we refuse to buy their oil and gas, their economy will not be able to support itself, all that has also fallen flat. And I think that is what the rest of the world is seeing. We need Russian energy. We need Russian metals. We need food and fertilizers. Russia is a supplier of all of this around the world. Countries need this, including India, including Africa. And I think those are the voices which are now coming out quite strongly. So it is entirely impossible for the US to survive without ample supplies of oil and gas. And in trying to isolate Russia, they probably underestimated the intelligence and the instinct of self-preservation or patriotism of the opaque plus. If this is the kind of mess that you are going to hand out to one of the largest energy suppliers of the world, what they did with their anti-Russia stance, what stops them from doing it against any of the opaque plus nations? What is the interaction that you had with the US spokesperson? And what do you think the US really is trying to tell the world, irrespective of what the reality might be? So my interaction with the US spokesperson, Zed Tarar, it was evident in that too that he couldn't really negate my question, my very pointed question. And I asked him that if you are all right with disarming and stepping back vis-a-vis China or any other ongoing or looming war, why do you have a different standard with Russia? And he really did not have an answer. I mean, the video is up for everyone to see. He tried hemming and hoeing. That in fact is not because he doesn't know the answer. That's because he's not allowed to give that answer out much like what I was mentioning about Obama or any of the other powers, you know, the voices that be. Zed, I find it strange that Biden was open to talking to Xi in an overt bilateral talk and in trying to reduce the tensions. Why not a similar effort for Russia? So the totally different stories. So the question is that you are in the G20. The G20 is a platform for diplomacy. If you don't talk here, then where will you do it? The missile that you are talking about, the missile is not going to stop. If you don't talk outside the war zone, then why are you so loyal to China? Why are you willing to talk about China? So I think you should give the missile. You will also warm up the power plants on the people. At that time, you will attack for the peace talks, I think. Zed, yesterday there was a statement from the CIA spokesperson that the CIA and the FSB chiefs have met in Turkey and have spoken. So is this not a double or a double? You don't want to talk openly, but the back channel talks with Russia and the statement is also giving. And my second question is that, is this essentially the limitation of the Democratic Party? You have taken a Russian opposition line since 2016. Maybe you are not able to team up with Russia. As far as our CIA director's meeting is at its place and as far as President Biden is at his own different channels. When we are talking about the Democratic Party, the reality is that they have a public line and you cannot deviate from that public line very much irrespective of what the reality is. But it doesn't seem whether it's the G-20 or in the United Nations that their attempts to really isolate Russia completely succeeding. Yes, people don't want war. Nobody is actually in favor of the Ukraine war. But what is the settlement going to be and how that settlement is going to be reached is certainly not going to be reached on Zelensky's terms or on NATO's terms. That is clear. What terms it will be reached at is something to be worked out as a part of negotiations. Today is 60 years again of the Cuban Missile Crisis. And in the missile crisis, the resolution today is actually when the Cuban Missile Crisis ends, then the resolution as we know now was that nuclear weapons will be pulled out by Russians, Soviet Union from Cuba and the Americans would pull out the nuclear weapons from Turkey. It was still something which gave enough to both sides and Cuba will not be invaded again. This was the basic arrangement. Of course, at the time people did not know about the Turkey part, that was not made public. It took a long time for that to become public. But the reality is that was a compromise. And what Zelensky is arguing that Russia should surrender to NATO and that's unlikely to happen. This is the reality of the war today. And I think what you are telling us about G20 also reflects this reality. Siddharth, last question to you. Since G20 is coming to a close, do you think the future of G20 is something to promise because India is going to be the next president? I think it's a mixed bag, Praveer, that we have seen that there is a sentiment from the G7 which is kind of giving up on the G20 as being a forum where they have enough influence. So we might actually see sabotage of criticism or simply the downgrading of the importance and significance of the G20. But within that lies the very opportunity for the G20 to actually get free of its colonialist past or the G7 hegemonic past. What if tomorrow, given that India is taking the presidency over and China is backing the African Union to come in and it gets a much bigger stage while pet programs of the G7 don't find enough traction. So maybe we will be able to actually rebuild something out of the broken or less than effective G20 in the coming year. And let's not forget that alongside the main G20, several bilateral and trilateral talks have happened between the member nations. So maybe the G20 will have to compete with the agreements and commitments of those to stay relevant and stay effective. Yes, we have the Shanghai Cooperation. There are many other platforms which are international and which are not dominated by the G7. So yes, thanks Siddharth for being with us, leading us to the current G20. Let's have a look at what finally happens in G20 when the final communique if any comes out and what will happen in the future is of course open to a variety of events in which there will be a different set of players who will play with Lula becoming the president of Brazil. Brazil might also assert itself in G20. Thank you very much and for being with us and spending this time explaining the various contours of G20 and the contortions as well. This is all the time we have today for Newsclick. Do keep watching Newsclick and do have a look at our international coverage.