“The war in Gaza must end now” calls for an immediate ceasefire from 25 foreign ministers

Summary

The Globalist — “The War in Gaza Must End Now”: International Calls for Ceasefire

Podcast: The Globalist, Monocle Radio
Host: Emma Nelson
Air Date: July 22, 2025

---

Overview

This episode focuses on a watershed moment in global diplomacy amid the Gaza conflict, as 25 foreign ministers—including heavyweights from France, the UK, Australia, Canada, and Japan—issue an open call for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza. The show provides detailed reporting and sharp analysis of the letter’s tone, Israel’s response, and the failing humanitarian situation on the ground. Other major stories discussed include German economic woes, US military aid to Taiwan, China’s megadam construction, Hong Kong’s embattled publishing sector, and the growth of India’s domestic tourism.

---

Key Segments & Takeaways

1. International Ceasefire Call in Gaza

[01:04–13:26]

The Letter’s Content and Significance

• Described as the strongest collective condemnation yet from key Western and allied nations, the letter accuses Israel of using starvation as a weapon of war—an explicit breach of international law.

• “We’ve now reached a point in Gaza where ... the Israeli government is using food and aid as a weapon of war, which is, of course, completely against international law.”
  —Leila Moulana, Middle East Correspondent [03:16]

• The letter highlights that:

  • Since March, Israel has drastically reduced UN aid, instead running its own limited aid system.
  • Over 800 Palestinians have been killed while seeking aid in the past two months, many at chaotic "aid sites" that resemble "an almost Hunger Games style of getting aid" ([03:16]), where people are funneled and sometimes shot.
  • The international community is preparing to "take further action," possibly including diplomatic recognition of Palestinian statehood or suspending offensive aid to Israel.

Enforcing the Statement: What’s Next?

• While diplomatic levers—such as recognizing Palestinian statehood, as suggested by France's Macron—are on the table, “the most important lever ... would be withholding offensive aid, the offensive aid that is allowing Israel to carry out these attacks.”
  —Leila Moulana [05:25]
• The frustration lies in Western governments “paying for the weapons that have killed now nearly 60,000 Palestinians in Gaza.”
• The magnitude and timing of such a strong statement, nearly two years into the war, is seen as highly significant ([05:50]).

Humanitarian Crisis: “A Man Made Famine”

• The situation in Gaza is dire:
  • Over 50% of Gazans face emergency food scarcity; nearly a quarter are in a catastrophic state facing “acute food deprivation.”
  • “One in three Gazans is only eating once every few days.” [08:21]
  • UN warehouses have three months’ worth of food at the border, only requiring Israeli permission to enter.
  • “We are in one of the most horrific situations we could be in … this is a man-made famine.” ([08:45])

Notable Quote:

“People really are on the brink of death now. And once again, this is a man made famine.”
—Leila Moulana [08:45]

Israel’s Response

• Israel rejected the letter, labeling it “disconnected from reality,” and accusing Hamas of being responsible for aid blockages and civilian deaths, a claim Leila disputes with evidence provided by aid organizations ([06:15–07:30]).
• Hamas is blamed for potential aid diversion, but Leila notes the UN found a less than 1% attrition rate for its aid deliveries, debunking Israeli claims ([06:31]).

Notable Quote:

“What is Hamas doing with baby formula? With incubators for premature babies? … The idea that those could be stopped from coming in because Hamas might take them, firstly doesn’t really make sense. And secondly, most importantly, … to deprive the entire Gazan population … is directly using aid and food and starvation as a weapon of war to achieve your war aims, which is a war crime.” —Leila Moulana [07:00]

Will Israel Listen?

• Leila asserts, “It’s becoming increasingly clear that Israel won’t listen to anyone ... the problem is that as [war crimes and aid blockages are] allowed to continue, this impunity has increased.” ([10:30])
• Even the US pressure has become ineffectual.

What Can Be Done Now?

• Strong international statements must be paired with action or “statements are pointless. We need action. There must be actual pressure applied.” —Leila Moulana [12:15]

---

2. US Military Aid to Taiwan and Regional Tensions

[14:17–20:06]

• The US is providing over half a billion dollars in new military aid to Taiwan, continuing the pattern since the 1979 Taiwan Relations Act.
• Defense expert Richard Heydarian points out, “This $500 million is really not going to go that much in terms of directly facing that [China] challenge,” highlighting that the sum is more political symbol than game-changer [16:26].
• Regional dynamics are tense, with Japan, Australia, and the Philippines increasingly roped in to a US-led integrated deterrence strategy.
• Domestic polarization is rising in Taiwan, potentially raising the risk of conflict.

Notable Quote:

“What the Taiwanese are really seeking for is clarity ... on whether the US will stand with them. And so far, it looks like the US is saying we’re going to provide the assistance here and there, but ultimately you have to step up. And also our Asian allies ... have to step up.”
—Richard Heydarian [17:51]

---

3. European Front Pages & Press Review

[21:32–30:29]

• NYT piece: Trump’s trade war rhetoric is ironically rallying pro-EU sentiment in Europe, reversing Euroskeptic trends from the Brexit era.
• BBC story: China’s new Yarlung Tsangpo dam project could threaten downstream water supply for India and Bangladesh—raising geopolitical alarm.
• The Times: Local Parisian resistance to a new Carrefour supermarket sparks a broader conversation about urban gentrification and cultural identity.

---

4. German Economic Challenges and Big Business Intervention

[31:21–38:22]

State of Germany’s Economy

• Monocle’s Chris Chermack summarizes three core issues:

  1. Energy transition woes—Russian energy disruption and clean energy transition have pushed costs up.
  2. Digitalization failures—Germany is lagging behind even other EU countries.
  3. Underinvestment—Private investment lags pre-2019 levels.

• 60 CEOs of top German firms pledged €631 billion in “investments” to rebuild the economy—but only €100 billion is actually new money.

Systemic Challenges and Social Fracture

• Analysis from Bloomberg editors Chris Reiter and William Wilkes highlights the lack of a unifying national vision or “German dream” and warns that social inequality could undermine the recovery.

• Notably, the vaunted Mittelstand (small and medium businesses) were missing from big-business-government meetings, despite being the backbone of German economic success.

Notable Quote:

“The risk is if that [investment] doesn’t actually affect the lives of people, that it just accelerates the decline or the handover of power to ... the far right AfD. And you need to get a certain sense of social buy-in.”
—Chris Reiter [34:49]

---

5. Pressures on Hong Kong’s Independent Bookstores

[38:36–43:26]

• At least six independent bookstores and publishers face aggressive, simultaneous tax audits and compliance inspections, which many suspect is targeted government harassment.
• Editor Tom Grundy explains this “systematic targeting” is shrinking already-limited space for dissent or controversial topics in Hong Kong publishing.
• Even book fairs and cultural events are being cancelled under unclear pressures.
• Most mainstream bookstores in Hong Kong are already under indirect Beijing control.

Notable Quote:

“These independent stores are very much occupying a dwindling remaining space ... a dying breed.”
—Tom Grundy [41:57]

---

6. Urbanism News: Vancouver, Milan, Singapore

[44:00–50:56]

• Vancouver: The Squamish Nation’s high-density waterside development in Vancouver is a milestone for Indigenous-led urbanism.
• Milan: Breathless growth in the Porta Nuova district spurred investigations into corruption in planning approvals, raising tough questions about urban transformation.
• Singapore: The city-state’s 2025 Master Plan focuses on targeted densification and modern heritage, setting a global example.

---

7. India’s Soaring Domestic Tourism

[51:32–58:05]

• Despite a hotel bed shortage (only 200,000 “branded” beds in all of India vs. 400,000 in the UAE), demand is powered by a growing Indian middle class and better domestic infrastructure.
• Companies are racing to add capacity, but unique Indian “homestays” and local guesthouses offer boutique alternatives that are part of the country’s hospitality culture.
• Ash Bhardwaj: “India has a really good opportunity to make the most of what it already has, rather than just worrying necessarily about what it doesn’t have.” [54:39]
• Hospitality talent drain remains a challenge, as many trained workers go abroad for better pay.

---

Notable Quotes & Timestamps

• “We condemn this drip feeding. We’ve seen this horrific killing of civilians.” —Leila Moulana [03:16]
• “One in three Gazans is only eating once every few days.” —Leila Moulana [08:21]
• “It’s becoming increasingly clear that Israel won’t listen to anyone.” —Leila Moulana [10:30]
• “The $500 million is really not going to go that much in terms of directly facing that [China] challenge.” —Richard Heydarian [16:26]
• “The risk is if that doesn’t actually affect the lives of people, that it just accelerates the decline or the handover of power to ... the far right AfD.” —Chris Reiter [34:49]
• “These independent stores are very much occupying a dwindling remaining space ... a dying breed.” —Tom Grundy [41:57]
• “India has a really good opportunity to make the most of what it already has, rather than just worrying necessarily about what it doesn’t have.” —Ash Bhardwaj [54:39]

---

Conclusion

This episode of The Globalist shines a spotlight on the escalating humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza and mounting international impatience with Israeli policy, offering grounded analysis of what real-world levers—diplomatic, economic, and moral—could yet bend the course of the conflict. The episode then deftly pivots across the globe to interrogate how geopolitics, economics, and social forces are reshaping societies from Taiwan and Germany to Hong Kong and India.

---

For further listening:

• Full interviews promised on The Monocle Daily
• Updates throughout the day on Monocle Radio

Transcript

[Emma Nelson]

We're proud to support the craft of journalism. UBS brings you the latest news from around the world with the Globalist on Monocle Radio. Be part of an international network that brings together leading insights, research and technology.

[Leila Moulana]

Across 24 time zones and 12 key financial hubs.

[Emma Nelson]

With you at the centre of it all, UBS advice is our craft. Live from London, this is the Globalist with me, Emma Nelson. A very warm welcome to today's program.

[Tom Grundy]

Coming up, Israel continues to use starvation.

[Theo Usherwood]

As a weapon of war, including the.

[Tom Grundy]

Killing of over 995 aid seekers.

[Emma Nelson]

More than 20 countries call for an end to the war in Gaza, accusing Israel of the inhumane killing of civilians. We'll examine the potential impact of the statement. Also ahead in the next 60 minutes, Germany's chancellor asks big business to help restart. We'll ask our senior news editor Chris Chermack what they can do and what they'll want in return. Welcome, Chris.

[Chris Chermack]

Thank you very much, Emma. Yes, there's been about 630 billion committed to Germany's economy, but much of that isn't new money. Germany's companies are going to be looking for streamlined regulations as well.

[Emma Nelson]

Thank you for that. Plus the papers, the latest urbanism news and why India's hospitality sector is thriving without the need for international visitors. That's all coming up on the Globalist live from London. First, a look at what else is happening in today's news. Ukraine says the next round of peace talks with Russia will be held tomorrow. In Turkey, the judge hearing Harvard University's lawsuit against the Trump administration has questioned the grounds of the White House withdrawing more than $2 billion in grants. And the U.S. justice Department has released more than 240,000 pages of documents related to the assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr. Stay tuned to Monocle Radio throughout the day for more on these stories. But first, the UN Secretary General has warned that the last lifelines keeping Gazans alive are collapsing. Antonio Guterres comments come as a letter from more than 20 nations such as France, the U.K. australia, Canada and Japan calls for an immediate end to the war in Gaza. The letter condemns Israel's drip feeding of aid and the inhumane killing of civilians and also calls for the release of the remaining Israeli hostages taken by Hamas on October 7th. Well, I'm joined now from London, my Monocle's Middle east correspondent, Leila Moulana. Allan, A very good morning to you, Leila.

[Leila Moulana]

Morning.

[Emma Nelson]

So could you just outline what is in this letter, please? Yes.

[Leila Moulana]

So this, this is really the strongest condemnation that we've had. Importantly Sort of all together from the uk, from and from a group of mostly European countries. And essentially what they say is that we've now reached a point in Gaza where, of course, since March, the Israeli government has been stopping aid from coming into Gaza in the normal ways through the UN and running its own aid method for the last two months, since it did start allowing a small amount in. And essentially what they are saying is that the Israeli government is using food and aid as a weapon of war, which is, of course, completely against international law. It says that, as you said, we condemn this drip feeding. We've seen this horrific killing of civilians. Over 800 Palestinians have been killed while trying to seek aid in the last two months, the vast majority of them at these aid sites run by the Gaza Humanitarian foundation, which essentially funnels people into cages in what has very graphically and unpleasantly been called an almost Hunger Games style of getting aid. And then many of them are then shot while trying to pick up that aid. Often the young men and families who are the only people left going out to try and find anything, any sustenance for their families. And what they say is that the Israeli government is denying essential humanitarian assistance to the population. It's unacceptable. They must immediately agree to a ceasefire. And most importantly, and this bit is key, at the end of the letter, it says, we are prepared to take further action to support an immediate ceasefire and a political pathway to security and peace for Israelis and Palestinians. Now, the question is, what does that mean? Thus far, there has been huge frustration that international nations have been very unwilling to actually take hard action to stop this war and to enforce aid being allowed properly through the traditional methods into Gaza. There are a couple of levers that are possible here. The most obvious is the diplomatic one, which is moving towards declaring Palestinian statehood. Now, that's something, of course, that Manuel Macron of France has been talking about a lot. Multiple countries have, too. That could be a very strong way of ensuring that both Palestinians have a better negotiating stance and also essentially twisting Israel's arm to follow. Along with this, there are more sort of even strong methods, the most important of which, of course, would be withholding offensive aid, the offensive aid that is allowing Israel to carry out these attacks. Because, of course, what many have so frustrated about is that Western nations are paying for the weapons that have killed now nearly 60,000 Palestinians in Gaza. So it remains to be seen what actually they are willing to do to enforce this statement. But right now, the fact that something so strong has come out at this point in the war, nearly Two years in is significant.

[Emma Nelson]

Now, the Israeli government's rejected this call from the letter that you described there, saying it is. Saying the letter is disconnected from reality. That is a clear refusal to accept the contents of the letter and indeed to respond.

[Leila Moulana]

It is, absolutely. And that's not remotely surprising. Yes, the Foreign Ministry has said this is disconnected from reality. And of course, as it usually says, it says this is simply benefiting Hamas and once again blames Hamas for everything, blames Hamas for the fact that people are being killed, blames Hamas for stopping aid getting in properly. Now, there really isn't any evidence of that. For a long time, Israel has accused Hamas of being the reason why they don't want aid to come in through the UN because they say that the aid is being taken by Hamas. Now, the evidence simply doesn't support that. There's clear evidence that there was a less than 1% attrition rate of aid that was coming in through the un, the usual UN channels. And also, very simply, as humanitarians have been consistently saying, petrol and things like that. There may be an argument for that. What is Hamas doing with water? What are they doing with baby formula? What are they doing with incubators for premature babies? What are they doing with basic food items? The idea that those could be stopped from coming in because Hamas might take them, firstly doesn't really make sense. And secondly, most importantly takes us back to this idea that to deprive the entire Gazan population of more than 2 million people of these items because you don't want Hamas to get them, is directly using aid and food and starvation as a weapon of war to achieve your war aims, which is a war crime. So that kind of cyclical situation we've been in, we still appear to be in. The Israelis still insist that they. They will only allow aid to come in through this Gaza humanitarian foundation. It's been very clear over the last two months with, as I say, over 800 deaths, as well as the fact that it simply isn't getting to most population, that the system does not work. And it's been widely condemned at this point what we're seeing in Gaza, and it's difficult with the scale of what we've seen in the months of this war, but to say that we are in one of the most horrific situations we could be in. The ipc, which is an independent organization that monitors food scarcity, says that more than half of Gazans are now in an emergency situation where they are facing severe malnutrition, severe food shortages and the possibility of death. And nearly a quarter of Gazans, that's nearly 500,000 people, are now in the catastrophic stage, which means acute food deprivation. One in three Gazans is only eating once every few days. And this, nearly a quarter of the population is facing severe acute malnutrition and potential immediate death. We've already seen 19 people in the last 48 hours die of malnutrition. You know, I mean, horrific scenes in markets where there is food, which is now very rare, 50 to 60 pounds is what it costs for one kilo of rice or flour. A man yesterday was showing half a potato that he had managed to pay $5 for. People really are on the brink of death now. And once again, this is a man made famine. So this is now what all these countries are pushing for. The UN says that it has more than enough food to feed everyone in Gaza for at least three months sitting waiting in warehouses on the Israeli border. And all they need is for the Israeli government to allow that food in.

[Emma Nelson]

Which focuses more on the fact that those who are trying to take action to feed and bring aid to Gazans are more and more helpless in this situation. I mean, you mentioned there that the UN has supplies on the border. And reports from the UN are saying that doctors and nurses are saying that they're watching children disappear. And I'm quoting directly there, and there's nothing they can do about it. We hear now in the last couple of hours that the UN Secretary General said that the last lifelines keeping Gazans alive are collapsing. Where is there an opportunity for aid to get through? I mean, who would Israel listen to? This letter is clearly not helping.

[Leila Moulana]

Well, that's exactly the problem. It's becoming increasingly clear that Israel won't listen to anyone. Part of the problem is that throughout this war, because of course, you know, for many there has been such a strong reaction to what happened October 7, 2023, and a feeling that it is important that, you know, they want to support Israel, that the ally of many of these countries there has been increasing impunity. And the problem is that as that moves forward and Israel is accused of various, be it war crimes within Gaza, be it not allowing aid in, be it attacking either medics, which they have done with many hundreds, or humanitarian aid workers, as of course we've seen them targeted as well targeting journalists, as each of these international crimes is either prevaricated over or allowed to continue, this impunity has increased. And the problem is we've now reached a stage where the Israeli government simply is not listening to any of its allies. It does not appear to listen to America as it did for many, many months when President Biden was not with force, admittedly, but trying to encourage Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to allow more aid in, at least the aid, you know, if, if they weren't going to stop this war. They of course did agree a continuous ceasefire carrying on from the first stage in March. And then the Israeli government went back on it and changed the terms and made it clear that they do want to stay in Gaza, that they want to have security control, that they don't plan on leaving and may even want to occupy part of it going forward. They now have this plan that has been widely damned by all international organizations and Western governments that they want to build what's essentially, they call it a humanitarian village, what will be an internment camp for many hundreds of thousands of Palestinians in the south of Gaza to hold them inside. That, of course, has been damned by the UN and it said that will be illegal and will be an internment camp, forcing Palestinians to essentially live in imprisonment. All of these plans, daily methodologies of this war, the fact that aid has been deprived for so long to so many people has been damned everyone, even those who are supportive of Israel. And yet we do not seem to be getting any form of reaction. And that's why I was saying, you know, you know, when we were speaking about the reaction to this letter, what matters now, if this letter is going to do anything, is that it is not just words. That is what so many people are coming out and saying. We must not just have words. Statements are pointless. We need action. There must be actual pressure applied. And that means diplomatic pressure in the form of certainly, you know, potentially moving towards Palestinian statehood, certainly in the form of potentially some sort of sanctions if Israel's unwilling to move aid forward in this dire situation and possibly even some form of military sanctions.

[Emma Nelson]

Leila, I'm afraid we're going to have to leave that there, but thank you so much for joining us on the line. That was Monocles Middle east correspondent Leila Malala. Allan, you're listening to the Globalist 1413 in Manila, 7:13am here in London. Now, the US is to provide more than half a billion US dollars of worth of military aid to Taiwan. The money can be used for defense equipment and training. The White House said that the funds support Taiwan's alignment with the core interests of the US and will go a long way to make sure Taiwan has the resources necessary to help prevent a Chinese invasion. Well, let's get more on this from Richard Hey, Darien, who's former research fellow at National Changi University, Taiwan, and author of the Indo Pacific Trump China and A New Struggle for Global Mast, he's on the line from Manila. Good afternoon, Richard.

[Richard Heydarian]

As always, my pleasure.

[Emma Nelson]

So just I outlined very loosely there that the money is going to be used for defense equipment and training. Do we have any more detail on that?

[Richard Heydarian]

Well, I mean, after all, this is part of a kind of a long established pattern by which, going back all the way to 1979 Taiwan Relations act, whereby the United States Congress, there's almost a bipartisan consensus to provide some sort of of fund that accelerates Taiwan's ability or facilitates Taiwan's ability to buy American weapons systems. We know that the Trump administration is actually pushing for $1 billion in terms of assistance, despite some opposition from certain quarters, including Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, who wanted to actually reduce it, thinking that countries like Taiwan are rich enough to stand on their own. So the way this works is that, that you give aid to these countries to buy more from America, but the expectation is that they buy way more than, let's say that $500 million or even the $1 billion that the Trump administration is proposing. The idea there is that Taiwan is facing an existential threat from China and that it has to massively spend on its capability. Last year, the US Under Secretary for Defense planning, Elvish Colby said that Taiwan has to spend up to 10% of its gross domestic product on its defensive capabilities in order to keep up with the challenge of the China threat. And the Trump administration in recent months has been also putting pressure on regional allies from Japan to Australia to also make it clear whether they will help directly in an event of contingency or war. So, in short, this is just a small part of a bigger Taiwan strategy to ensure Taiwan is strong enough to be able to withstand China, but also that the United States will be in a position to more effectively defend and Taiwan should a major contingency emerge.

[Emma Nelson]

Indeed. I mean, the Taiwan Relations act says that actually the United States has to provide Taiwan with defense, with arms, with equipment. How much further does this commitment go than what the United States is obliged or ordinarily commit?

[Richard Heydarian]

Well, I think the amount is not significant. I think it was just 100 million increase from the previous years and throughout the different administration. By the way, going back all the way to the first Trump administration, we have seen over time billions of dollars of defense aid and defense deals being signed between the two sides, despite strong opposition from China. I think the bigger issue right now is what President Trump himself has been saying about to what degree is the US Willing to stand by Taiwan should there be a major conflict with China? Because interestingly Trump, Trump during his first administration, and even more so when Biden was the US President, they made it very clear that they will come to Taiwan's rescue should there be a major war. Because, you know, you're looking at China that is spending hundreds of billions of dollars in its defense capabilities every single year. So this $500 million is really not going to go that much in terms of directly facing that challenge. So at the end of the day, I think what the Taiwanese are really seeking for is clarity on the part of the, the second Trump presidency on whether the US Will stand with them. And so far it looks like the US Is saying we're going to provide the assistance here and there, but ultimately you have to step up. And also our Asian allies like Japan and Australia have to step up, not to mention my country, the Philippines, which is also getting ensnared in this issue by also giving Americans more access to its bases that are close to Taiwan.

[Emma Nelson]

Indeed, the fact is, as you mentioned, there are wider implications for defense in the region if Taiwan isn't, is not equipped sufficiently to defend from any attack from China. Is there a sense that from where you are that Taiwan is protected and indeed the region is protected?

[Richard Heydarian]

Well, I think the situation is absolutely fragile. I just came from Poland where we had conversation about what lessons China could draw from the conflict in Ukraine for a potential conflict in Taiwan. So you have this entwinement of not only the security interests of, let's say, Philippines and Japan, who are more and more cooperating together because they're flanking Taiwan to the north and south along with the U.S. but we also have more European countries more directly paying attention to what's happening in this part of the world, whether because they have direct interests or they have also shared interests and also direct strategic cooperation with Japan with Philippines and regional allies. So this is increasingly becoming, becoming a kind of a US Led integrated deterrence strategy which no longer just involves Taiwan and its immediate neighbors, but a growing number of countries also from NATO and Europe. And that's what makes this potential conflict very important. But as everyone knows, there's also a domestic polarization that is happening in Taiwan as a huge number of the parliamentarians from the opposition party, ironically, this is the government which was at civil war with the Chinese Communist Party a century ago. Now they're seen as a pro China party. And there has been a recall of up to a fifth of the members of the Parliament in Taiwan, basically accusing these folks of being a bit too pro China. I mean, I've been in Taiwan a lot of times. I was there visiting scholar. I saw that polarization throughout the years, but it's getting really, really fever pitched. And the concern is that as the Democratic Progressive Party, which is more pro independence, at least in terms of its positioning, gains more influence, that could also put more pressure on China to do something more decisive. So yes, we are all optimistic that we may be able to establish enough deterrence to make China think twice, especially about as we see Russia struggling in Ukraine throughout the years. But I think there's no room for complacency.

[Emma Nelson]

Richard Heydarian, former research fellow at the National Cheng Chi University in Taiwan and author of the Indo Pacific Trump China and the New Struggle for Global Mastery. Thank you so much. Thank you very much for joining us on the line from Manila. You're listening to the Globalist with me, Emma Nelson.

[Tom Grundy]

Still to come, merits has almost like refused to acknowledge what is the vision behind the infrastructure spending platform? Where is Germany headed? How does the German dream define itself?

[Emma Nelson]

We'll hear about how Germany's business leaders are pushing the Chancellor to get the economy back on its feet. Stay with us. On the globalist craft is its own reward, which is why at UBS, we're honoured to work alongside over 50 of today's leading Nobel laureates, each an expert in the art of economic science, bringing you engaging discussions, actionable insights and inspired solutions, all focused around the questions that shape our world today. For a better outlook, find a Nobel perspective. UBS banking is our craft. Let's continue now with today's newspapers. Joining me in the studio is Theo Usherwood, political journalist and broadcaster. Very smartly dressed this morning. There's a man on the way to something how what are we doing today, Theo?

[Theo Usherwood]

I'm not on the way to anything in particular, but it is, of course the last day of term in the British Parliament in Westminster. It is a day when the government likes to get all the bad news stories out of the way very quickly with various written statements and hope that MPs don't pick up on them. And then everybody breaks for their summer holidays. So do you stand.

[Emma Nelson]

Sorry, you all stand there with nets, basically waiting to see what comes out of.

[Theo Usherwood]

Yes, they have to tell Parliament. They have to tell Parliament generally everything they should do anyway departments. And on the last day of term, what they tend to do is they tend to hold back all the really bad stuff for the final day of term and then they put them out in written ministerial statements. So there'll be about 30, I imagine, when I look at the order paper later. And they're generally, you know, where departments have made a mistake. I don't think they'll be on the scale of the Afghan leak scandal that came out last week, but there'll be plenty. There'll be a few, I'm sure, amusing bits of where ministers have made or civil servants at least as well have made mistakes.

[Emma Nelson]

Excellent. We look forward to reading all the problems. Let's have a look at the New York Times, the first story that you want to bring to us, a really interesting profile about how the European Union, it is never the most perfect of administrations and blocks, dare we say it, but the fact that Donald Trump is launching tariff threats left, right and center is actually making people grow in fondness for the European Union.

[Theo Usherwood]

Yes, it's a story in the New York Times and the reason I picked it out was because it was in the New York Times. Their audience are cottoning onto the fact or the newspaper is cottoning onto the fact that actually Trump is having a unifying effect in the European Union. Of course, as you rightly said, they cite Liberation Day, Trump's trade war against the eu. There's also the galvanizing effect of Donald Trump wavering on his support and America's support for NATO. He's equivocated more than once on Article 5 about whether America would come to to the aid of the European Union. Indeed, it was notable in the deal struck with Germany, Keir Starmer's deal struck with Germany and struck with Emmanuel Macron of France in that state visit a couple of weeks ago, that as part of those agreements there was an understanding that we would come and the French would come to our aid. And ditto Germany. So it's supported for the European Union. Compare and contrast. And this is what the New York Times does as well, which is very interesting to 2016, Britain had voted to leave the European Union. Trust in the European project was at an all time low. And the figure they've quoted the poll, the particular poll that they picked out is a poll of Danes where five years ago 63% of voters there had trusted the European Union. It's now to 74%.

[Emma Nelson]

It might have something to do with Greenland.

[Theo Usherwood]

Yes, yes.

[Emma Nelson]

Actually there's a really good table in it. I'm not one normally for tables, but it's a good one which talks about better leadership and the approval of the EU, the EU's ability to steward itself and actually America's ability to lead as well. There has been that shift, hasn't there, towards the European Union, given the fact that the leadership in America is so volatile.

[Theo Usherwood]

Yes, and it points to, this article points to, whilst acknowledging, as you say, the European Union is recognized as not being perfect. Ursula von der Leyen, the Lehrn, the president of the Commission, which is the executive branch, has tried to get to grips with the burgeoning budget problems that she has faced. All the while, of course, we've seen the rise of populist parties here in the UK and France, Germany and in Italy as well. So, so the European Union, this doesn't sugarcoat it. The European Union is not without its problems. But in recent years, as you rightly say, this table which is who has better leadership. And it points to the fact that compared to 2010, when it was equal ish between the US and the European Union, now it is viewed that actually the European Union has far better leadership compared to America.

[Emma Nelson]

Let's move on to another story that you've want to bring your attention to, which is it's quietly, something is going on very quietly, but it's a. It has huge consequences. China is building the world's biggest dam. Tell us why you wanted to tell us about that.

[Theo Usherwood]

It, it has huge implications and this is on the BBC and they picked up on the implications for relations with India and Bangladesh. So they want. The Chinese are in the process now. They've already. Chinese Premier Lee Kuang has already presided over a ceremony to start the construction of the Yarlong Sang Po on the Yarlung Sampo river at the weekend. And this is a river that flows through to the Tibetan plateau. It's going to be, it's going to cost 125 billion pounds according to 167 billion dollars. It's going to be the world's largest hydropower dam, three times larger or able to generate three times as much power as the second largest dam, which is also in China. And the concern is that it will give the Chinese huge sway over the economies of India and Bangladesh, which rely so heavily on the river for, for agriculture, life, wildlife. And there's also a fear in the article in the BBC that it could be weaponized to create a water bottle, that the dam could in effect release millions of tons, if not billions of tons of water flooding, flooding parts of India and Bangladesh and having a devastating effect. And this story seems to have gone under the radar somewhat, but the BBC have picked it up.

[Emma Nelson]

Okay, let's move on. To the Times, always good to have a poke at the French and it's no exception today. It's all about a supermarket, the Carrefour.

[Theo Usherwood]

They want to. In the Montparnasse district of Paris, which is a quiet corner, quite chic corner of the Left Bank. This wouldn't be a. This would have to be a Times story because of course the Times of London always likes having a little pop at the French. The Carrefour City would like to open an outlet. And of course, this is an area which is home to, as the newspaper says, the likes of Pierre Richard, who's a veteran film star, Alain Suchon, the singer songwriter, amongst others. And they are very worried that allowing Carrefour to open this shop is going to draw noise, undesirable people. According to the Times, it's just around the corner. I don't know if any of your listeners are familiar with Emily in Paris, the Netflix series, but there will be some, There will be some, but they have a. One of the cafes, the Brasserie, is round the corner from where they want to open this particular shop. The Celine Hervo, the Socialist mp has said that Richard residents wanted to stop the development from submit because it would just mean, as she put it, standardization. There is an interesting. There's somebody who has actually come to the defence of Carrefour and this is the Jean Pierre Lecoq, the conservative mayor of the 6th district. And he's accused the rich, artistic locals of behaving like a village of spoiled children who thinks that everything belongs to them.

[Emma Nelson]

It is marvellous and it is that I think the Times for once has actually hit the tone very beautifully because they talk about the. The location, about how the children and their nannies go off in British stark right shoes and go and play in the very smart Luxembourg Gardens. It's a very great article and I love the fact that the conservative mayor of the arrondissement is called Jean Pierre Lecoq, the best name ever. Theo Asherwood, political journalist and broadcaster. Thank you so much for joining me in the studio. You're listening to the Globalist. Now here's what else we're keeping an eye on today. Ukraine says the next round of peace talks with Russia will be held tomorrow in Turkey. Officials from Moscow and Kyiv held direct discussions for the first time in three years earlier this year in Istanbul, but yielded little progress. The judge hearing Harvard University's lawsuit against the Trump administration has questioned the grounds for the White House withdrawing more than $2 billion in grants. The judge said the administration should demonstrate faults in individual university staff rather than make blanket moves against the entire university. And the U.S. justice Department has released more than 240,000 pages of documents related to the assassination of Martin Luther King. The files include records from the FBI, which had monitored the civil rights leader as part of effort to discredit his movement. This is the Globalist. Stay tuned. We look now to Germany because after two years with zero growth, there are fears that the economy might not be able to recover very well. So yesterday, the CEOs of 60 top German firms held a meeting with the Chancellor to pledge their support to rebuild what was once widely seen as Europe's economic powerhouse. Chris Chermack is Monocle's senior news editor, joins us in the studio now. Good morning, Chris. How are you?

[Richard Heydarian]

You?

[Chris Chermack]

Good morning, Emma. Good to be here.

[Emma Nelson]

You're in a better state than the German economy. How did it get this bad?

[Chris Chermack]

Am I in a better state? Well, I hope so, I suppose, yes. I mean, there's, I don't know.

[Emma Nelson]

Do you need 60 business leaders to come and rescue you?

[Chris Chermack]

Would be nice, wouldn't it? I mean, so there are three things I think, that stand out that I'll mention briefly. One is energy. Okay, this is the big one, if you want, for why Germany's economy is falling flat. It was reliant on Russia. And in addition to that, you had this whole energy transition that was going on over the last couple of decades, started under Angela Merkel to move away from coal and their reliance on sort of carbon intensive energy. So you had that transition happening to cleaner forms of energy. And then you had Russia come in, the invasion of Ukraine, which meant that natural gas and all of this was no longer possible as well. So energy has become increasingly expensive. That's a problem for companies. Digitalization, another one very far behind Germany when it comes compared to other countries, including in Europe, it is not very good at technology advancement and so on. Startups, they've tried to increase the amount of startups in Berlin. It hasn't worked very well. They're not good at digitalization. And then the final one is lack of investment. They're just not investing enough money. Investment from private companies about 5% below 2019 levels. That's the one where Friedrich Merz really wants to turn the screen.

[Emma Nelson]

So this is where the, the big names turn up. And they were big names that went over to the, to see the Chancellor yesterday. And they've pledged what, more than 600 billion euros of investments? Is this new money?

[Chris Chermack]

It is not new money. Just, let's just get that right out there. They admitted afterwards, 631 billion euros by 2028, an eye watering sum about, according to one of the participants, about 100 billion is new. So yes, it's not the biggest amount, it's something. 61 companies are participating in this blue chip startups, financial firms, Allianzen, KKR and so on and so forth. And what Friedrich Merz will tell you is that Germany is back. This was about setting a new tone for the German economy. And of course this does come on the back of the German government wanting to invest hundreds of of billions of dollars in government infrastructure and they want to scale up private investment. That is the big part of sort of what this is about.

[Emma Nelson]

Yes. What does he actually want these companies to do? Because if this money has already been committed, is this sort of a redirection of the cash or what? Exactly. If you're the CEO of Siemens, what did you promise that you would do for Friedrich Metz yesterday?

[Chris Chermack]

You promised that you would continue to invest and you look at ways to invest further. That's essentially what this is about. It is stepping up investment, using the government fund that are there and also to cooperate with the government in terms of how you're going to go about this going forward. But at the same time I think what is lacking is this clear vision for exactly where Germany's economy is headed. And for that I spoke with Chris Reiter. He's a senior editor across economics, politics and business for Bloomberg. He's written a book, co authored a book called Broken Republic the Inside Story of Germany's Descent into Crisis. Here was his take on Metz's initial initiative.

[Tom Grundy]

On a certain macro level like Merits is making, you know, sort of positive moves.

[Chris Chermack]

The risk is that it stays on.

[Tom Grundy]

A macro level and that Merits forgets the micro level, the people involved and that the fact that social inequality is a thing and it's getting worse in Germany and that undermines the very social fabric. I fully expect that that Merits can get some investment and rally some, some spending in Germany. And the risk is if that doesn't actually affect the lives of people, that it just accelerates the decline or the handover of power to say like the far right afd. And you need to get a certain sense of, of social buy in from people and have a certain vision which Merits is almost like refused to acknowledge of what is the vision behind the infrastructure spending platform? Where is Germany headed? How does the German dream define itself not just for the next three, four years of his term, but how this is laying the foundation for something bigger and broader.

[Emma Nelson]

So this is existential stuff though. Chris Reuter there talking about what is the vision for Germany, what is the German dream? The fact that they need to get social buy in so something has to come from the government in return, doesn't it? And, and this promise for investment in infrastructure and promise to help with social capital is a very sort of amorphous pledge, isn't it? So again, what is it that Mertz is going to have to do now to make sure that everybody joins in?

[Chris Chermack]

So this is just the beginning, if you will. This is an announcement that Germany is back, that it is going to invest. And now comes the hard part in terms of tackling things like government regulations. Increasing work incentives is something that a lot of economists talk about. Lowering taxes and particularly easing bureaucracy as well. Those are the key things. And then also to Chris's point, sort of when he was talking there, Chris Reiter, about sort of integrating migration, all of these issues that come with sort of increasing the skilled workforce in Germany. And one final aspect of this that has been heavily criticized is that, you know, when it comes to that social fabric, Germany's small and medium sized businesses, the vaunted Mittelstand as it's known as they were missing from this. So there were not many leaders of Germany's Mittelstand that were there. They provide about three quarters of the revenues from German companies. Why weren't they there? I spoke with William Wilkes, global business reporter at Bloomberg, he's based in Frankfurt, also co author of the book mentioned before and he spoke about this lack of Mittelstand voices. What was missing from that announcement?

[Tom Grundy]

It was perhaps some of the focus.

[Chris Chermack]

On some of these smaller family businesses from the Mittels understand that have really strengthened Germany in the post war period. As we write in the book, Germany.

[Tom Grundy]

Before the war had this, during fascism.

[Chris Chermack]

Had this strong alignment with the big, big companies, Deutsche bank and IG Farben, which was later split off into BASF and Bayer and things. And then in the post war period when Germany was growing strongly and you had really kind of wealth dispersed among broader communities, it was the Mittelstand that.

[Tom Grundy]

Played a crucial role in and I.

[Chris Chermack]

Think they were missing. Today it's fine seeing kind of German.

[Tom Grundy]

Top politicians and these big business leaders meeting together.

[Chris Chermack]

But what Germany really needs is a.

[Tom Grundy]

More kind of deeper collective sense that we're coming together also on the economy.

[Chris Chermack]

So it would have been good to.

[Tom Grundy]

See more representatives of family businesses there like the Mittelstand.

[Emma Nelson]

Will Wilkes there talking about the absence of the Mittelstand. Thank you for that, Chris. Tell us what else you're doing today.

[Chris Chermack]

So I'll be working on that interview in part. You'll hear more from Will Wilkes and Chris Ryder later on the Monocle Daily. Also planning working on a summit in Helsinki that's coming up next week that I'm hoping to attend of foreign ministers from lots of countries.

[Emma Nelson]

Brilliant. Chris Chermack, thank you so much for joining me in the studio. You're listening to the Globalist 1438 in Hong Kong. Now, Hong Kong's independent publishing industry is facing a lot of pressure. At least six book stores and publishers are under simultaneous tax investigations. The authorities are demanding explanations for personal transactions dating back seven years. Government departments are conducting frequent inspections of businesses. And industry insiders are fearing that the sector is being systematically targeted. Well, Tom Grundy is the editor in chief and co founder of the Hong Kong Free Press. Very good afternoon to you, Tom. Thank you for joining us.

[Tom Grundy]

Thanks for having me.

[Emma Nelson]

Let's look at the what exactly is being done to these six independent bookstores? I mean, they are under tremendous pressure.

[Tom Grundy]

On, yeah, six companies in the past year and a half. And individuals related to the bookstores have also seen tax audits being told they're being randomly selected. This is weeks after it emerged. Independent newsrooms are also facing simultaneous scrutiny. Some of the companies concerned are brand new or they've relatively tiny turnover. That raises questions as to why they're a target. I mean, the cost of investigation upon taxpayers probably outweighs anything they'd be liable for. But, you know, major chains, they reportedly censor books in Hong Kong on certain topics or those written by certain authors like Pro democracy figures. And certainly we know libraries do. It's not just stuff on things we know are sensitive to China like the Tiananmen crackdown or whatnot, but libraries have also gotten rid of, say, you know, romance, romance novels by one Pro Democracy activist. So now we're seeing the attention turn to bookstores, independent bookstores.

[Emma Nelson]

How dangerous are bookstores being seen as by the authorities?

[Tom Grundy]

Well, let me just add the Inland Revenue tax Department says that such reviews, including audits and investigations, apply to all taxpayers, irrespective of their industry or backgrounds. And like I say, the independent media sector has also seen these apparently random tax audits. But, you know, we know for decades that there have been Internet controls and restrictions on publishing in mainland China. And certainly we're seeing more of the latter now in Hong Kong. It's not even particularly new or part of the security law era, this pressure on booksellers. Over a decade ago, there was a shop in Causeway Bay selling books banned in China that shuttered with some of the men behind it facing trial in the mainland. One, a Swedish national, Guminhai, he actually disappeared from Thailand, was paraded on state TV in China and is still behind bars. And the wider picture now in Hong Kong is that for years Beijing's office in the city, through a series series of shell companies, has exercised ultimate control over now 28 odd publishing houses via a conglomerate, Sino United Publishing. So they control most of the city's mainstream bookstores. So these independent stores are very much occupying a dwindling remaining space, but they're very much a dying breed and this.

[Emma Nelson]

Has now been extended or some are suggesting that the book fair of the House of Hong Kong Literature suddenly canceled the event which was supposed to be happening today. Do we know why that has happened?

[Tom Grundy]

Yeah, that opened on Friday and was scheduled to run for 10 days. And quite typically they said that due to factors beyond our control, they were forced to call it off. It's not hugely unusual in the, you know, we've seen over a dozen odd event cancellations. Often it's the venues cancelling the bookings. That book fair was meant to be an alternative to the city's official, huge official book fair that's promoted by the government. But independent publishers have accused that fair of censoring them and some have been barred from taking part or told to remove certain books. I mean, this isn't the only kind of pressure. Hunter Bookstore, if you look at our right upon the tax affair, they have also found their door knocked by different government departments exercising, I guess, pressure over compliance. Over the last three years. They've got a huge calendar in their shop, a massive banner showing how many inspections they've had from the Fire Services Department, the police force, the company's registry, the Food, Environmental, Health Department, the Buildings Department, the Labor Department. Never any prosecutions, but warnings over different compliance issues. So whether it's events or the bookstores itself, they're facing pressure from different directions.

[Emma Nelson]

Tom Grundy, editor in chief and co founder of the Hong Kong Free Press, thank you so much for joining us. On Monocle Radio, you're with the Globalist. With ubs, you have a truly global.

[Leila Moulana]

Partner incorporating new technologies, innovative approaches and.

[Emma Nelson]

Unexpected opportunities leading you to insights that help answer the questions that matter. Delivered with passion, care and unmatched excellence expertise. Because it's about rising with the dawn each day, knowing that we can do even better.

[Jessica Bridger]

That's what banking is to us.

[Emma Nelson]

Not just work, but a craft. UBS banking is our craft 7:44 in here in London. Let's talk urbanism now. Jessica Bridger is a journalist and consultant on urbanism, regular Monocle contributor who's headed off to Klosters. A very good morning to you, Jessica. I trust that something nice is taking you to Klosters.

[Jessica Bridger]

Good morning, Emma. I live partially here and it is school holidays and vacation time in Switzerland. So it's bustling in this small mountain community.

[Emma Nelson]

Excellent. Wonderful. Well, thank you so much for taking time out of your bustling community life to talk to us about urbanism. You've just given us a very good example of how it works. What's been making the headlines where you.

[Jessica Bridger]

You so a little bit larger than this mountain community is over in Vancouver where the Sanak development built by the Squamish Nation is really coming to kind of the end of its first phase. It will by the end of this year be home to its first residents. And it's a massive development. It will by the end of this decade provide 6,000 housing units over 4.25 hectare along the water in the center of Vancouver. And this is being built by the Squamish Nation on their land which they were forced to leave about 100 years ago. And this marks a return. And the interesting thing is that it's very high density development and high density development is something that we need in many center cities. But it's really hard to do legislatively in terms of what the public does and doesn't want. But this development has been greeted with a lot of enthusiasm and is being built on land that actually the Squamish Nation controls in kind of opposition to a format where it's more undercity or even, you know, state or country control. And that has partly been responsible for what's allowed it to be so dense and so high. One of the towers is even 100 meters tall.

[Emma Nelson]

And the future residents of this development, will they be exclusively from the Squamish Nation or is this something that the Squamish Nation are doing on their land but to welcome in other people?

[Jessica Bridger]

People there will be other people welcome in. So it's not only housing. It's also offices, retail and cultural spaces along with new transit and public space. And 80% of those housing units are market rate. Right. So that's really economic development for the squamish nation. And 20% are affordable housing. And what's interesting is that this will be the kind of largest indigenous led housing and mixed use development in the history of Canada.

[Emma Nelson]

Canada, let's Move on to another development, but closer to where you are in Italy and to Milan. Now, Milan, for the last few years, if not decades, has pushed really quickly ahead in developing the city, opening it up, creating new residences, creating new communities. This has not gone without problems.

[Jessica Bridger]

No, it hasn't. But it's been interesting to watch it happen because it's been held up as an example of how you can very quickly develop part of a city and kind of redefine the city's image, making Milan this contemporary, bustling, booming metropolis in less than two decades. And that's the Porta Nuova area. Unfortunately, it is now the subject of an investigation involving over 70 people in a sprawling corruption probe, looking at fees that were supposedly paid for approvals to build large parts of this development. And that's something where you can look at if that was the mechanism to get this done, to get this development done, what parts of that are outside jurisdictional and things that the city would want or find desirable and only benefited private people, private capital flows, and what parts of that actually benefit the city as a whole. So there's a whole nother conversation that you can have about how we build urban density and when it doesn't follow normal legislation, native program, how that, you know, legally, in terms of responsibility to the larger city, in terms of the citizenry, how does that play out? And in Milan, it's a really interesting thing to look at. You know, this area of Milan has the Uni Credit tower, which is 231 meters tall. It has the Bosco Verticale, which is the famous skyscraper with the forest planted up along it. And that's something that has become iconic for Milan. But there's been a real estate price rise of 42.5% since 2016. Let's contrast that with Rome, that since 2016 it's in less than 5%.

[Emma Nelson]

Finally, let's talk about another city which has, which is redeveloping, moving, however you'd like to describe it, but possibly in a slightly more orderly way. Singapore.

[Jessica Bridger]

Singapore, the capital of orderly urban development, has released its Draft Master Plan, 2025, and that will guide the next 10 to 15 years of urban development in the Southeast Asian nation. And it's on public view from now until the end of November. Singpo is a leader in urban design and planning. And the draft master plan is relevant not only as the city state's blueprint for the future, but also as a reference to state of the art urban planning ideas and norms. And that follows for Singapore, for Southeast Asia and also globally Singapore is often held up as an example of how to do various urban development experiments, well founded norms, kind of best case projects really well. So the draft master plan has new neighborhood areas, the refinement of existing areas, community infrastructure. But interestingly it also defines conservation buildings and so called identity nodes. And this year Singapore is celebrating its 60th year since independence and the master plan has a strong focus on preserving its modern heritage, looking at post independent sites that have contributed to Singapore's history in economy, housing, social and defense issues. Modern heritage preservation is an interesting topic across the world and many cities would benefit from such an initiative. We tend to look at heritage as things that happened a century ago, more than a century ago, even a thousand years ago, looking back at Roman times in Europe. But really heritage can also be our not so recent past.

[Emma Nelson]

Jessica Bridger, journalist and consultant on urbanism and regular Monocle contributor in Zurich. Thank you so much for joining us. On the line from Clusters, you're listening to the Globalist on Monocle Radio. Finally on today's program, Indian hospitality is having a moment. After the pandemic, there was the expected uptick in tourism, but the market has continued to grow, so much so that demand is outstripping supply of hotel beds. Well, Ash Bhardwaj is a journalist and author of why We Travel. I'm delighted to say he's joining me in the studio. Very good morning to you, Ash. Nice to have you in.

[Ash Bhardwaj]

Yeah, nice to be here.

[Emma Nelson]

Good to thank you for coming into the Globalist. Right. So just outline for us what's happening in India.

[Ash Bhardwaj]

So India's tourism economy is growing and there's two reasons for this. You know, I remember the first time I backpacked around India in the early 2000s, you had really two strands of international tourists. You had the backpackers who are tending to stay in guest houses either in the middle of the cities or then out in the countryside. And then you had wealthy international tourists, luxury tourists. They go looking at the safari parks, go looking for tigers, that sort of thing, or maybe going down to Goa. But you have seen over the last 20 years in particular a huge growth in Indian domestic tourism. There's a couple of different reasons for this. One is the growing middle class people are wealthier, they've got disposable income. The second is there's been a real growth in the infrastructure that supports internal domestic tourism. So you have better airline routes and air connections, there's better roads. And there's also an increasing aspiration. So people are being inspired to travel internally. The Indian Government is setting things up better and they're developing new tourism destinations. There's places like Ayodhya, controversial. It's where the new Hindu temple was built a few years ago. There's a lot of unrest around it, but that's really been pushed as a tourist destination destination. So there's just more people traveling internally. And then also international tourism is still growing.

[Emma Nelson]

So to meet this demand, what is happening? Because by all accounts there are not enough hotel beds for everybody to sleep in.

[Ash Bhardwaj]

So what they call branded hotel beds in India. So this is Accor, it's Radisson, those brands that you'll know from around the world. There's about 200,000 hotel beds across India in that country category. There's 400,000 in the UAE. So that gives you an idea of the difference. And India's got 100 times the population of the UAE. So that just gives you an idea of the scale of difference of India to other countries that have big international tourism. The companies behind this are looking at growing these numbers quite a lot in the next few years. IHCL, the Indian Hotel Co. Ltd. They've got about 350 hotels that they're building or operating across India. They want to grow that to 700. But the other thing is India's always been very good at hosted and low scale tourism. I was chatting to a guy called Mini Chapande from a company called Village Ways and they host people in local community homes rather than in big hotels. And they've seen a growth in domestic tourism. It's not just backpackers staying in these places. And the reason why that's great is it puts money back into the local community. It's not being taken out by big.

[Emma Nelson]

And when you look at the homegrown efforts say, I mean, you mentioned that, really lovely. So I think, think anywhere else you'd call it boutique. But actually, you know, is perhaps an issue of sort of self country branding with this thing that actually that the tourism industry actually needs to find its own language and to find its own feet in India because it's probably taken itself by surprise here.

[Ash Bhardwaj]

I have found in the times that I've traveled, like I say back in the early 2000s, making some films recently for a couple of TV channels. We were in Ladakh, we stayed a couple of nights in, you know, a hotel in Ladakh that had been built there. The times I enjoyed much more was when we were staying in local guest houses with a family that owned it. So absolutely, India has a really good opportunity to make the most of what it already has, rather than just worrying necessarily about what it doesn't have. Now I get the drive for tourism of this sort of hotel, particularly in the cities, because there is a demand for business conferences, for weddings, other needs that you might use a hotel for. But certainly around India, they should definitely make the most out of the opportunities of what they already have with home stays. As you say, boutiques is what you'd call it in other countries.

[Emma Nelson]

Indeed, it's a gentle rebranding of something that does itself rather well. But the international voices, I mean, the Accors and the Radissons, I mean, how it's. Does it. Are they a little bit slow to.

[Ash Bhardwaj]

The party here in terms of. There's already the demand in India and they just should have got ahead of it earlier. I mean. I mean, I'm quite surprised that this is the state that those hotel chains are already in. India has been called a rising economic power. And I've been hearing about the growth of domestic tourism for at least the last 15 years. I've been writing about India. I remember going to Delhi in 2012 and going up to the ITC Moria, which I think is owned by Marriott. I mean, it was an amazing hotel. The level of service I saw in 2012 there was unlike anything I'd seen in any hotel before. Sort of a legacy of this class structure that you do find in India. But you had butlers in half of the rooms and the food was amazing. I'm surprised that they didn't see that opportunity from the other big hotel chains.

[Emma Nelson]

What about keeping the homegrown hospitality workers, which is. It's a challenge for any country who perhaps has an underdeveloped hospitality scene that actually the best of the best will not stay in India. They will go to. They will go to. Well, they'll come to London for starters. Only if you go into any brilliant hotel here in London, a huge proportion of the staff are going to be Indian. So why aren't they back in India getting things going?

[Ash Bhardwaj]

I've noticed exactly that same thing in London in the last few years. So many of the people in the hospitality sector are Indian. India has really good hotel and hospitality management schools. But Manish, the guy from Villageways, he was telling me that basically the pay just isn't good enough for people to want to do that. I mean, one of the challenges. Challenges is internal. But then you do have this pull externally. If you could earn that much money, why wouldn't you come here? So the key for these hotel chains is, you know, people don't want to leave home if they don't have to. So it's making sure that the money is there to pay them sufficiently to keep them there. It doesn't have to match wages over here.

[Emma Nelson]

And there is a just to ask you briefly about the fact that the domestic tourists seem to be the, you know, the most comfortable, seem to be the most popular market. Is that because India has so many tourists, it doesn't need to have international tourists who might be subjugated to geopolitical movements? And so they're just quite happy with having Indian tourists in Indian hotels.

[Ash Bhardwaj]

And also, India is an extremely appealing destination to travel on. There's such diversity. You can go to cricket, you can go to sports, you can go to music, you can go to religious pilgrimages. There's lots of different reasons to travel around India. So the domestic market is strong and it is resistant to geopolitical upheaval.

[Emma Nelson]

Ash Bardwaj, thank you so much. Journalist and author of why We Travel, joining me in the studio today on the Globalist. And that's all the time we have for today's program. The warmest of thanks to all my guests and to our producers, Chris Chermack, Tom Webb and Ryuma Takahashi. Our researcher was Henry King and our studio manager was Elliot Greenfield. After the headlines, more music's on the way. I'll be back with a briefing live at midday here in London. The Globalist is back at the same time tomorrow, but for now from me, Emma Nelson, goodbye. Thank you very much for listening.