B (2:34)

Yeah.

A (2:35)

Less beach it's pretty wet there at the moment. Everything is pretty much flooded, but, yeah, sadly, no beaches. Yeah, she went to an interesting seminar about sort of the general collapse of British political institutions, which was, you know, very, very timely and lots of, lots of good gossip going on there and it's just always a beautiful place to go.

C (2:56)

Well, we will start with Europe in general and its progress, or otherwise in adapting to the reality that it has to worry in two direct. Since Russia's assault on Ukraine was echoed by the United States threat to invade Denmark, UK Prime Minister Sakir Starmer has signalled that the UK might want to have another crack at joining the EU's security action for Europe Defence Fund, known by the extremely clever acronym safe. Efforts were made in this respect last year, but fell in a heap when the UK claimed the price of entry was too high. And in accordance with centuries of traditional blame, the French. Terry, first of all, does Starmer seem serious about this?

A (3:37)

I think he seems serious that he wants to have another go at it. And I think there seems to be a general. I think they're just haggling about the price at the moment. I mean, there seems to be a general agreement that this would be a good idea, but I think it's a question of all of the other trade offs. I mean, this was something that Keir Starmer was talking about on his way back from China and Japan, where he'd, you know, been been traveling there and talking to sort of the traveling press pack with him. So the fact that, you know, on coming back, this was one of the things that he, he wanted to raise again, I think is quite significant, though I mean, didn't seem to be much progress on it in the actual talks about the resets that are going on at the moment. And I think the sort of defence part of this is slightly separated out to try and make it not obvious that they want to do trade offs with other things like youth mobility and tuition fees and all of the other negotiations that are going on.

C (4:31)

I do want to come back to some of those wider implications of this, but in thinking specifically about defence, Justin, it struck me as interesting that Starmer is still trying to pitch this in overtly Trump pleasing terms. I quote, we've got to step up and do more. It's not only President Trump who thinks Europe needs to do more, but other presidents as well. I think the same.

B (4:54)

Yeah. I mean, I thought it was notable that he included that, but it is also the one kind of safe bone that you can throw to Trump because I think it's the one point, as we've mentioned on the show before, where he probably is right, you know.

C (5:08)

Yes, the stopped clock twice a day.

B (5:10)

ET very much, or stopped or once a day in his case. But it was. I think that's one of the things where you can say that you can safely throw him a bit of recognition without it compromising anything else too much. I mean, it's the. There's been a number of these stories that I would sort of think of as these kind of page six of the FT stories where you sort of see these things cropping up every few months and you're there forming a bit of a pattern and the. Those sort of smaller deals that are going through in the background. You know, Norway's agreed to a 10 billion deal for the anti submarine warships that are going to be built over here. Britain's agreed to sell 20 Typhoon jet fighters to Turkey. And these things do, you know, obviously when we think about our relationship to Europe, that sort of piecemeal, not quite rejoining, but certainly becoming more reintegrated, I think feels like it's all moving, as Terry says, in the same direction there.

C (6:01)

Well, on that subject, and as you were foreshadowing, Terry, there is a wider context to this that Starmer, since he became leader, has been been maintaining a hard no on things like the Single Market, Customs Union, freedom of movement, saying, you know, we have left the European Union. Whether I agreed it or liked it, agreed with it or liked it or not, we're not going back. Can we imagine that shifting as the next election draws nearer? Because that would be a real point of difference between labor and the parties of the right, divided though they are, if they just said, yeah, return us to office, Single Market, Customs Union, Freedom of Movement, I suspect might be a bridge too far, but we are ready to negotiate on those bases.

A (6:46)

I think there's a couple of different things going on here. I think on the one hand, yes, you've got quite a lot of cabinet ministers, for instance, who are pushing Keir Starmer to go further on this, perhaps to join the Customs Union and they are trying to sell it as something that will benefit consumers and voters. So, you know, your kids might be able to go and spend time working in Europe, your dog might be able to get a pet passport. You know, just making, making life easier. I mean, of course, with Keir Starmers there's a caveat that he hasn't. Not really good at that, that vision thing. But I think there's also a tendency within Downing street where they are seeing the battle as being against Nigel Farage and reform and the Conservatives that they don't want to frighten the horses and they don't want to go too far because, you know, if they do do this in a way that is where the benefits aren't immediately obvious to people that they are, you know, really deeply worried about losing Labour seats come the next election and even in by elections and so forth before that.

B (7:41)

One thing I thought was interesting coming off that was with these stories how, I think how little pushback there has been from the right. And if you think back to Brexit 10 years ago, that idea of we may get involved in a European army, whatever shape that takes at any point, that was an absolute specter that the right were constantly invoking. And the idea that anything that was even a slight move towards a European shared military or would be a disaster for this country. And I've actually seen very, very little pushback on it this time. And I feel emotionally that something has shifted there in terms of just even this is a recognition that the security architecture now is so different and the idea that we could just be under America's umbrella, I think is for the birds at this point and that there are going to have to be alternative arrangements.

C (8:28)

On the subject of the Prime Minister, Terry, we should pivot somewhat to more domestic concerns and with all due recognition that I'm sure everybody here and everybody list listening, would much rather right now be at the party at Gordon Brown's house. The Peter Mandelson thing is, is really quite bad because this, I mean, we are now learning more from the release of correspondence from the latest Epstein files drop of how entwined that relationship was. Mandelson is, I believe, stepping down from his spot in the House of Lords, leaving the Labour Party, etc. There's some talk of legislation being passed to stop him calling himself Lord Mandelson. But the point that people are going to raise, and not without reason, is that quite a lot of this would not have been news to the UK security services, who presumably informed the Prime Minister, who nevertheless sent Mandelson to Washington as the ambassador. Is there a way Starmer can style this out, especially if as now seems far from impossible, the police do get involved in this.

A (9:34)

I think it's really difficult. I think he's going to face a lot of questions on what did not only the Foreign Office know in terms of vetting Peter Mandelson as Ambassador to the United States, but also what did people in Downing street do? Did they overrule any of this advice, and did they have access to the kinds of files that we are now seeing coming out from the Department of Justice? Because.

B (10:00)

Yes.

A (10:01)

I mean, you know, it is not impossible that Peter Mandelson could face prosecutors for misconduct in public office because of the emails that he was forwarding on to Jeffrey Epstein with very sensitive information about how Britain was going to deal with the financial crisis, which then ended up with the bankers who. That they were trying to regulate, you know, as. As far as we know. I mean, this is really serious stuff. Yes, it happened quite a while ago, but, you know, there should have been concerns about it and, you know, the questions of what else was he doing and who else was he talking to? I mean, it is really unbelievable that he is someone who's had political comebacks over the last 40 years and, you know, you'd think this would absolutely, you know, be the end of him now.

C (10:44)

Well, how many times.

B (10:47)

Will reform take him?

C (10:50)

But, Justin, just before we move off this, to what do we ascribe, like, Mandelson's extraordinary capacity for. For coming back from the dead? Because people such as all of us gathered here who've been paying attention to British politics for a long time now, will remember a good few such moments.

B (11:08)

Yeah, I mean, it has the sort of whiff of familiarity, doesn't it? I mean, I can see if I was going to sort of step outside of this, take out the morality, the good judgment, the common sense, and say, why would you have sent him to America as an ambassador? Presumably the thinking was given the people that we want him to ingratiate himself with and deal with. I mean, in all seriousness, I think there was probably a case where the Americans had made it very clear who they would not have as ambassador and who they were hoping to unseat from, you know, previous incumbents. And I think there may have been the kind of moment where a government says, I don't know if there's any good options here. This bloke at least speaks their language. But as we say, as to Terry's point, if what has been reported is accurately reported, these are not even gray areas. If any of us at this table were in any job where something similar took place, we would, you know, our past would be back with security within hours. Like, it would not even be a subject for debate.

C (12:07)

Well, to India now and to the possibility that it may be building a profile of being that emergent superpower, which, whatever its faults, at least isn't Russia or China. In recent weeks, India has concluded an immense trade deal with The EU and as of yesterday, seems to have repaired trade relations with the United States. A phone call between India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi and US President Donald Trump has reportedly resulted in tariffs on Indian exports to the US being lowered from 50% to 18 and India agreeing to stop buying oil from Russia and instead shop for fuel in the US Or Venezuela. Justin, we are currently taking President Trump's word for this, which is always an act of faith. Do we actually think Narendra Modi said, yes, the last drop of Russian oil has passed through our pipelines with his.

B (12:58)

Fingers crossed behind his back or fool me once and all that? Yeah, I did notice in the BBC report where they, you know, listed the claims that Trump had made about the Greens stop buying Russian oil and then just noted on a separate line, India has not yet commented. So there may be. I mean, I thought Modi's response was interesting in what he did say where he thanked Trump, quote, on behalf of the 1.4 billion people of India for this wonderful announcement, which I thought was quite a nice quiet flex on Modi's part of. Can I just remind you what a potential prize the Indian market is? And it's, I mean, India is in a really interesting place at the moment because it's, you know, the scale of it, it's somewhat like China in that it's easy to forget the, just the scope and the scale of that as a market. You know, also with a largely English speaking, you know, population, hugely capable workforce, you know, huge geostrategic importance, and yet the way they have been treated over the last year on account of tariffs, you know, exports from India to the US have absolutely plummeted. Things like textiles and jewelry that are hugely important to them. But the one that I think is getting overlooked, that I think think is more damaging longer term is this absolute unforced error of the Americans in the removal of student visas and the damage they are doing the amount of human capital that flows into America from India. And you know, we have all been around universities, tech companies, things like this, where to generalize quite broadly, the smartest people you will meet are Indian post grads who are working in things like machine learning, critical fields like machine learning, engineering, digitals, and just this decline in soft power where I think it's 44.5% drop year on year in the number of Indians who've been permitted to go into America. They will all be going and studying somewhere else. And just in the Cold War where you had that, you know, competition for where do Indian medics go, huge numbers of them went to Moscow to be trained. It's one of the reasons that we have so many historically Indian medics working in the National Health Service because we tried to offset that by clearing the path for them. And I think there's a huge amount of damage has been done to that relationship.

C (15:05)

Terry Trump also claiming that India had agreed to spend $500 billion in the U.S. sure, why not? Do we.

B (15:12)

In about two weeks?

C (15:13)

Yeah, in about two weeks. Do we assume that this is just one of the numbers he says?

A (15:19)

I think we do. I think until, unless and until we see some more details on what exactly has been agreed. The Indian reaction, as you say, just into, you know, what exactly they think that they have signed up to and just, you know, the logistics of it. I mean, y. Trump might be able to say, yes, we're going to be buying U.S. or Venezuelan oil. You know, the logistics of that are not going to be necessarily straightforward and the, you know, the trade is, is not going to be straightforward. But I think India seems to be playing its hand quite well, you know, both the US and with the EU and the UK as well. Agreeing, agreeing these deals and you know, they will probably profit, as you say, from being neither Russia nor China and having all, you know, the technological advant and the industrial advantages that you're just pointing out.

B (16:10)

One thing I thought was interesting that you about them in relation to Russia and China and I know you love a geopolitical theory, Andrew.

C (16:16)

Absolutely.

B (16:17)

That India is what Russia thinks it should be. It's this great world historic civilization that is currently being sort of courted by all the major powers, seat at the top table, treated with sort of great respect and deference and you know, I think they're in a really enviable position at the moment.

C (16:35)

But on that thought, Terry, I mean, we have recently seen the likes of Sakir Starmer, Mark Carney, the Prime Minister of Canada, beating a path to China, trying to, I guess, find alternative markets while the United States continues having a nervous breakdown. But India is now up to nine free trade agreements in four years. It is clearly an outward looking country, as Justin was pointing out earlier. It is broadly English speaking. It has a cultural, I guess, overlap, familiarity, understanding with Canada, the United Kingdom, Kingdom, the wider West. It is still, despite Modi's drift to authoritarianism, a robust parliamentary democracy. I mean, it does seem like this should be the country that the likes of Starmer and Carney make more effort with.

A (17:21)

Yes, and particularly because, you know, India holds this kind of, you know, middle ground and they could sort of shift their allegiances slightly more towards, you know, towards one block or the other. And you do want to sort of tie them into that international, you know, the international order in as far as as it still exists. I mean, I think, you know, the EU are perhaps being slightly over optimistic about what they can get on it. I've seen, you know, commentary about, you know, the German car makers who were sort of famous and notorious in, in Brexit in terms of what, what they might want or what they might do, saying, you know, we're going to be able to sell so many German cars into India. And if you look at what is currently, what Indians are currently wanting to buy, it is mostly Indian, Japanese or, or South Korean cars. So, you know, their sort of attention is still, will pretty much turn more eastwards I think. And you know, they've still got to have, got to have something, we've got to have something to sell to Russia.

C (18:13)

And its prospects of competing in any big ticket international sporting tournaments anytime soon. Russia was punted out of such events as the World cup and Olympic Games after launching its full scale assault upon Ukraine in 2022, eight years after its initial invasion of its neighbor, during which interregnum everyone was happy to attend the 2018 World cup in Russia. For some reason, FIFA president J. Gianni Infantino, a holder of the Russian Order of Friendship Medal, has suggested that Russia has been on the bench long enough and that keeping Russia out of the 2022 and 2026 World Cups, among other tournaments, has, quote, just created more frustration and hatred. Ukraine Sports Minister Matvi Bidny has pointedly responded by noting that among the casualties of Russia's rampage are more than 650 Ukrainian athletes and coaches, including at least 100 footballers. Terry this, this concern of Infantino, that keeping Russia out of the previous World cup and the next one has just created more frustration and hatred. Is the correct response? Didums?

A (19:22)

Yes, I think probably, I mean, I think, you know, FIFA are not known for being, I don't know what should I put it, the most absolutely scrupulous of organizations, perhaps tactfully put. And you know, it just, it's one of these things that seems so obvious to me, you know, no, of course, you can't start inviting Russian athletes back under their own flag until we have solved the war in Ukraine and you know, which would ideally mean them leaving Ukraine and you know, to the idea that to suggest you can hold this out as some kind of prize for near, for sort of, they're not playing Nicely, you know, why, why on earth should you be allowed back into international competition?

C (20:05)

I mean, Infantino has also said, Justin, that the keeping Russia out of these events has not made any difference. And if you look at the news, you can see that he possibly does have a case there. But are we perhaps, do you think, living in a different world now? If before the 2018 World cup everybody just said, well, we're not coming much, as a lot of countries did after the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan in 1979, there was a widespread boycott of the Moscow Olympics?

B (20:34)

Yeah, I mean, then as now, I don't think it would have been a decisive factor. But what I do think it served a purpose in, in that I think it's easy to be cynical and say, well, these things sort of don't change anything. And they maybe don't in terms of the end material outcome, but they do starve a country of tourism revenue. They deny them the platform for making grandstanding political statements and they also prevent them the opportunity to just sane wash themselves and normalize things. And they do take this seriously. And if you think, you know, if you look for official. I know because I've had to do this for work. If you look for official photos via the UEFA channels of the Champions league finals from 2012 to 2022, there are remarkably few photos of those finals because there is Gazprom branding all over every single available surface in the stadium. And all those images have basically been scrubbed from the record because, you know, the reason they put a huge amount of money into these competitions, as brands always do, is because it does lend them legitimacy, it does lend them a normality. And it just means that, you know, every time you watched a Champions League game on itv, every single ad break came with a sting for Gazprom, who just sounded like a nice, normal energy company as opposed to what they actually are. And, you know, I think, yeah, to Terry's point, you know, no, of course we shouldn't let them back in. I mean, to Infantino's point, originally I thought when he said, you know, it's the, it's causing all this sort of like hatred and anger. And I thought that's ridiculous. Ridiculous. Actually, having said that, given the mixture.

C (22:06)

Where Justin pivots to pro Infantina, has he promised you some sort of trophy?

B (22:12)

It's more a medal. But given the strange blend of self pity and historically fantastical resentment that Russia trades in, this probably is something that's massively winding them up. I mean, it's about as logical and sane as Most of the other reasons they've come up with for or being the way they are at the moment. So maybe Infantino's got a point, but that's not a hill I'm gonna die on.

C (22:36)

Is there an argument of the. What about variety though, Terry? Because Iran and Saudi Arabia, to name but two, will be competing at the World cup, any number of obviously objectionable countries will be sending teams to imminent Olympic Games. And I guess we probably have to acknowledge the unimaginable relief of the organizers of the World cup that Israel did not qualify.

A (23:02)

Yes, I mean, you know, there is obviously sort of a sliding scale, a scale of international bad behavior and you've got to decide the point at which you draw the line and say this is enough. But I think, you know, invading your neighboring country and fighting a war for, for four years is, is pretty much, you know, that correct side of that line. And yeah, maybe there are questions about, you know, Iran, particularly in the, in the current situation. You know, yes, people make arguments about should you punish the athletes themselves for what their governments, which probably in the case of places like Iran and Saudi Arabia is not very much. Sort of not their fault. But you know, you've got to make a stand somewhere. And this, that's where I would do it.

C (23:43)

Just finally on this one though, Justin, the IOC had decided last year that Russians and Belarusians at the upcoming Youth Olympics in Dakar will be able to compete under their own flag. So that's the younger athletes. Is that a reasonable gesture? We're sort of making it clear that we are not going to visit the sins of the Father, etc.

B (24:04)

No, I think the sins of the father should be with full weight. I think if you're going to say if one. You're representing a national team and the flag, I think if one, one team's out, they're all out. I do think my prediction for the summer would be at least one team is going to boycott the World Cup. I would put money on that. Really?

C (24:21)

Do you want to put money on which team?

B (24:22)

I don't, but I think something will happen in the next few months. That means domestically a team has to step up out.

C (24:30)

Okay, well, that's, that's an exciting prediction. Terry, do you, do you have any off off pissed World cup protections predictions.

A (24:36)

You would like to make really isn't, you know, I'll probably say some, I would say some country that wasn't in it, surprise them team aren't going to.

C (24:43)

Be playing surprise run to the semi finals for Curaco. Yeah, who, who are in it. But to Japan, where it says here some love la young Japanese folk. Have we read of searching for that special somebody on apps and are endeavoring to meet people in real life. They are, however, not le it entirely to chance. Large scale meetups organized by local governments have become a thing, as have dedicated matchmaking bars. Nevertheless, according to one survey, nearly a third of Japanese couples who married in 2025 met in the first instance through one app or another. Terry, could this be one of those things that peaked during the pandemic? Obviously, apps, like all forms of remote interaction, had a bit of a moment when nobody could leave the house.

A (25:31)

Yes, I guess so. But reading up on the way that they are trying to counteract this in Japan, I think they have got an awful long way to go in terms of the social skills that people require to actually talk to each other in person. There was a man who was meeting a woman at one of these occasions and he described her as attractive as seen from behind. This is a relationship that's not going to get very far. That's the best thing you can find to say about her.

C (25:57)

He. He is hopefully not writing his own vows. Justin, I, I am mean mesmerized by the idea of local government becoming involved in this. I mean, would you be keen, for example, to outsource this area of your life to the London borough of Richmond upon Thames?

B (26:12)

Well, they already deal with sort of getting rid of my rubbish.

C (26:17)

There's a taking out the trash joke right there.

B (26:19)

Yes, I am the trash in question. I mean, it strikes me they probably couldn't do any worse because the whole enormous racket of dating apps is that firstly, you have businesses where, where failure is built into their business plan. If everyone logs on and finds the love of their life in two weeks, then the business drops pretty quickly. Various leaks and sort of data dumps over the years have shown that the standard ratio on most sites shakes down. They're about 70, 80 male. So when men are like, you know, why, why can't I get so much as, you know, a wink or a swipe or whatever? It's like, well, that's why, because, you know, you're essentially in a penal colony full of men at this point. I think the broader thing of switching this to real world meetups, I suspect is going to become more prevalent because as with many industries, dating apps are grappling with the problem of AI at the moment. And suddenly if you've got users flooding the site with photos which are not just 10 years old, as many people have done previously, but completely invented or of people who don't actually exist. They're playing sort of cat and mouse game there. And I think the trust level in those sites is going to plummet accordingly and real world meetups may make a return as a result.

C (27:37)

Because on that thought I was reliably informed by somebody who works at a company that I will not name Terry. And it's not this one to be clear, that one of their younger employees was unaware that the company ChatGPT account basically was accessible to everybody in the entire company. So everybody could see that he was using it to crank out pictures for his dating app. Not by pictures, pictures, I mean not so much the photo, but his, his patter was all being generated by ChatGPT. So we, we embark upon this nightmare of just online app accounts with fake photos chatting to each other via AI mediated language.

A (28:17)

Well, I think this is happening everywhere. I mean it's happening if you look in LinkedIn, which, you know, don't do anyway, everything is AI generated and there seems to be for authors, there's this growing phenomenon which is really bizarre. Facebook, fake book clubs and fake influencers sending you a long AI thing which praises your books. Your praises like that of Kashua Ishiguro. You have such an amazing moral sensitivity.

C (28:38)

I'm not getting any of these.

A (28:41)

They're really, really flattering. It's like, would you like to us to help promote your book? And then once you've had three or four of these, can you, can you.

C (28:46)

Send them mine and Justin's address?

A (28:48)

Yeah, sure. One came from someone called Becky Content, so they hadn't even bothered to change the names.

C (28:52)

Not Becky Content.

A (28:54)

Yes. Someone got one from somebody like, you know, Julia Book Visibility. So they're not very convincing yet, but they're very flattering.

C (29:00)

If you can't TR Julia Book Visibility, who can you trust? I mean, all he wants try and close this discussion on a constructive note. If you had a tip to pass on to the young and lovelorn and not necessarily Japanese, but sure, why not Justin, what would it be?

B (29:17)

Well, I'd sort of paraphrase the words of the great Australian celebrity criminal Chopper Harden up. I believe was his phrases. Harden up, get down the pub, actually speak to some people in person. And it worked just fine for us for 20 years in ye olden times. And you know, get off your screen, Terry.

A (29:35)

Yes. And ask people questions about themselves. Don't just talk about yourself.

C (29:40)

Insane talk.

B (29:41)

I'll do that. When Becky Book Content.

C (29:45)

Terry Stiasney and Justin Quirk. Thank you both for joining us. Finally on today's show, the United Arab Emirates has played a central role in global diplomacy over the past year, mediating talks on Gaza, Iran and Ukraine, including potentially another round of direct Russia Ukraine talks tomorrow. That makes the world government summit especially timely as it gets underway today in Dubai. Monocle is right there with a pop up radio studio and cafe on site. If you are there, do drop by. Monocle's Gulf correspondent in Zamam Rashid spoke with Anwar Gargash, diplomatic advisor to UAE President Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan. You can hear part one of their interview on the briefing which you can find on our website. Here's part two. They begin by discussing the art of diplomacy and how important it is to teach diplomats the value of nuance in today's world. World.

D (30:33)

I think it is, it's more difficult to keep your feelings in check. But you know that when you do that then you can actually play a more important role. But I think with regards to that, we have, we have a small diplomatic corps, so we spend a lot of time training that diplomatic corps. Our embassies usually are quite, quite small embassies in terms of cadres, diplomatic cadres, etc. I think we've gone also through a cycle. We've tried different things, we've tried, you know, various formulas, but right now I think we got it right. So you have to graduate from, with your bachelor's and then you go through interviews, etc. And we pick something like 40 to 50 diplomats who are university graduates out of a thousand applicants. So the core is very, very small. And they don't all need to graduate from political science or international relations. They graduate from different areas because in today's diplomacy the sort of focus and knowledge so widespread can be climate, can be AI, it can be engineering, can be so many different things. Where the foreign ministry actually works as the first post box for any country, everything comes there first. You try and do that. Now once you've done that, I think the mentoring part is extremely important because you can have very smart men and women, but they, in my opinion, they also need to sort of progress through chain for them to be a little bit wiser, for them to be a little bit more humbler. So I think the mentoring also is extremely important. And then in many cases also you throw them into the fire. So suddenly they, they find out, especially if they are in special teams that are tasked with a conference or they are tasked with something like that, they know they have to deliver within. Let's say four, five months period from A to Z. And this also sort of tests their capability to work with their more mature colleagues and to try and get something effective.

E (33:01)

I think it's fair to say as well, your excellency, that you've probably been thrown into the fire over the last couple of years. In particular, obviously, you're very close with Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed, speaking to him regularly. And you have been not only around Russia and Ukraine that we've spoken about, but also what's happening right now potentially with Iran. We've seen the arrival of Donald Trump's beautiful armada as he's, as he's branded it here in the Middle East. It feels that the world government summit has fallen stolen at a time where the region is a little bit tense. Is that fair to say? And what's your take on where things are right now? What's the state of play?

D (33:41)

I think the region is always tense. So if it's not one issue, it's the other issue. So basically, the fundamentals, in my opinion, remain the same. I think, number one is you have to articulate your view view. You have to keep your diplomatic channels open. You have to have the credibility where you are seen to see the same thing, whether it's outside or in closed doors. Because if you lose that credibility, then it is a fault with your diplomacy. I think, vis a vis Iran, the first thing I want to say is as a neighbor to Iran, the last, last thing we want to see is a military confrontation. And we are very concerned about it. We understand that Iran also has to move forward and this is an opportunity for it to address many of the recurrent issues that have, you know, that have basically galvanized, you know, the region negatively and among them, of course, the nuclear program. So this is a time where the Iranians need to need to negotiate directly with the United States. I think this has been also part of our message to direct message to the Iranians on more than one occasion. We don't want to see confrontation. We've had a difficult relationship with Iran over many years with its good, with its bad. But we're neighborhood and at the end of the day, I don't think we want to see a confrontation there. But I think we have an opportunity today through negotiations, hopefully to arrive at a solution. In my assessment, if these negotiations don't work, then we might actually see an escalation that is not in favor of Iran or any, any, any of us.

E (35:37)

Can I just ask on that point? You know, it was pretty clear that Donald Trump was about to do something maybe a week ago, and then obviously he's brought in even more resources here. Is it you that is picking up the phone, that is having conversations directly with Iran and the United States? Just, just briefly tell us how that de escalation works, which is what the UAE and other Gulf states want so, so badly?

D (36:00)

Well, I, I don't want to claim that it is us. I think it's more than one element here.

E (36:07)

You're part of it.

D (36:08)

I do. You know, I mean, we as a country in the region have been consistent. The region that's just come out of two years of bloody war in Gaza and all the repercussions around it in Iran and Syria and other areas is not looking forward to another war and another confrontation. This is really our view publicly, privately, but I think President Trump's calculations are more than that. I think there are many, many other things, but I think we are definitely a voice for looking for political solutions to this issue.

C (36:47)

That was Anwar Gargash, diplomatic adviser to the president of the United Arab Emirates, speaking there with Monocles Gulf correspondent in Zamam Rashid. Tune in across Monocle Radio for much more from the world government summit in Dubai through this week. That is all for this edition of the Daily. Thanks to our panel analysts today, Terry Stiasney and Justin Quirk. The show was produced by Chris Chermack and researched by Annalise Maynard. Our sound engineer was Elliot Greenfield with editing assistance from Steph Chungu and Sam Impey. I'm Andrew Muller here in London. The Daily is back at the same time tomorrow. Thanks for listening.