Yalda Hakim (5:43)

So Brian Thompson via email writes, do you think that Donald Trump may have overplayed his hand to Putin? I ask this because Trump uses the speaker their lives mantra to get a ceasefire deal with Russia. Yet Putin's mantra is that life is cheap and dispensable. Putin may use this as a way of watering down Ukraine's peace deal while getting more of his own demands. Past the post. You go first, Richard.

Richard Engel (6:07)

Well, people here think that Trump is being played by Putin and that Putin doesn't care how many troops he sends into Ukraine. How has more troops to begin with and has a real ally in North Korea. So we talked about Kursk last week. Kursk is this. It was a gamble that Ukraine took in the, in the summer. And Ukraine, I remember when we talked about it at the time, we were messaging back and forth, what is going on here is Ukraine just invade Russia and that's what it did. In the summer, Ukraine launched a surprise operation Boom, moved into Kursk. Russians weren't expecting it and they took about 1,000 square kilometers. Very quickly, Russia, initially, Putin initially said, ah, it's no big deal, hardly even notice. Then he rallied forces, rallied forces and he got tens of thousands of Russian troops, the best in his army, plus North Korean troops who were very slow to get online, but then started getting online and getting better and better and just routed the Ukrainians and, and they had to retreat in a sometimes disorderly retreat on foot. It was a very difficult battle for them, which the Ukrainians ultimately lost. So the Ukrainians will say, if you look at what's going on, that is why they don't believe that Putin really wants peace, that he had this agenda in mind. He, he has manpower, he doesn't care about using it. So look at what he does, don't look at what he says. Now, it could be that Putin just wanted to finish this last bit of Kursk, get rid of Kursk, and now he's more prepared for serious negotiations. That's also possible. Maybe he needed to get rid of this one part of Russia, not get rid of but liberate this one part of Russia that was occupied by Ukrainian forces. And I think it's right to describe it as liberate. You know, when, when Ukrainians take back a town that Russians captured, we say they liberated it. So from the Russian perspective, they were liberating their own territory. So maybe it is now that he's liberated this pocket of Russia that was taken, he's, he's more in a position to, to have, have peace talks. We will find out. Even though this initial 30 day ceasefire didn't really take off, they're still talking about it and they're supposed to have a new round of discussions in Saudi Arabia. Perhaps post Kursk, they can, they can make more progress.

Yalda Hakim (8:37)

Yeah, and I think, Richard, we keep Talking about this 20% of land that Russia has taken from the Ukrainians and Crimea, and the Russians are saying, well, we're not giving it back. You know, the, the Russian ambassador to the UK said, it's in our constitution, we're not giving it back. It's not even on the negotiating table. The concern is that it's not just that Russia wants the 20%, you know, it's that Russia wants the 82%. And the 82% then means Moldova as well, and the Baltic states as well. And that is the concern of the Europeans that President Trump is seeing this as some kind of deal and that, you know, it's about giving the Russians the 20% that they want and telling Ukraine, nope, you're not going to be part of NATO and that will, you know, be the end of it. But actually, Vladimir Putin's ambitions, his ambitions for a great Russian empire, moving beyond just Ukraine and creating that ancient Rus that he often talks about and has written about, that is the main concern here. And that will outlive any US President as far as Vladimir Putin is concerned.

Richard Engel (9:43)

So that's Ukraine. But you are in a very unique position. Tell us what, where you are, what you're doing there. What is this event that brought you to Delhi?

Yalda Hakim (9:55)

Well, Richard, I come to this event and I've been coming here for the last decade. It's about 10 years old. This is their 10th year. It's called the Raisina Dialogue and it's India's flagship geopolitical and geoeconomic conference. And unlike the other conferences that you and I often frequent, like the Munich Security Conference, for example, which has a very unique European, Western, American outlook, this is looking at the world from the so called global south. So the perception of the world from a completely different vantage point. So when the conversation around Ukraine sort of was discussed here. By the way, the Ukrainian Foreign Minister is here as well, so we had big conversations with him around it. But I talked about this issue of Ukraine, the ceasefire where America is is at with a panel yesterday which consisted of the former Canadian Prime Minister as well, Stephen Harper. And he said, you know, the era of the international rules based order as we've known it is not just in crisis, it's not just being challenged by those who have built it, namely the United States, but it is basically over and it is now about big powers, the United States, China, Russia, these spheres of influence.

Richard Engel (11:21)

It gives you a great perspective because you're really at a place where so many different world voices, international voices are representative as you said, not just from the club of democracies or the European conference circuit, but Iran, China, Norway, Canada, sort of whole bag of interesting voices. So I know you can't collectively sum up everybody's opinion, but what was the mood? What is the atmosphere there? Are people in panic. You said that the world as they knew it, the world that was established largely by the US but also the surviving European powers after World War II, drew up this international system and are they seeing it being torn apart?

Yalda Hakim (12:08)

You know, it's interesting, Richard, because when you come to this part of the world, when, when you ask them about the rules based order or the world order, they sort of say, what rules based order? These are rules you guys created and expect everyone else to play by those rules, you know, sure. You know, there are certain values and there are rules and norms that we need to abide by. And the fact that we do have the UN and the UN Security Council, but often and for decades you guys have broken the rules and then you turn to us and say, well, why are you doing this? And that's kind of been the interesting grievance of the Russians, the Iranians, the Chinese who also have a delegation here, and the Indians who have said, listen, we didn't come to existence and our rules and values didn't come to exist 80 years ago. That's a system you guys created.

Richard Engel (12:58)

I've heard similar things people say, you know, to, to the US and to other European leaders in a, in a cautionary way. Be careful. You have benefited tremendously from this world order. You that you have benefited in your ability to make sanctions. The. The US dollar is the world's reserve currency which allows the US to have enormous influence over global economy or can, can sanction countries, their ability to move money around, enter the swift system, not use the Swift system. If that went away and there's suddenly a different rules based order or no rules based order, and people are just using their own currencies the same way you and I can, you know, pretty easily change currencies these days. If, if that, if that catches up, you know, I have a banking app on my phone. I can switch currencies in two seconds. There's no, that this sort of dollar based order that was even involved in banking just a few years ago is kind of moving away. So, please. Countries that have felt aggrieved by this new order are clearly pleased. Are you seeing them offer alternatives? Is China saying, hey, okay, here's the new order we should do. Russia's saying, here's the new thing that should replace Bretton Woods. Everything that Trump is sort of tearing up.

Yalda Hakim (14:21)

It's interesting because in my discussions, Comfort Ero, who is the president of the International Crisis Group, said, you know, this is the most deadly and violent period that we're living in. We've not seen conflicts like we are seeing at the moment. And I said, well, what about Rwanda and what about Bosnia in the 90s and you know, what about a whole host of conflicts? And Indians jumped in and said, well, actually, if you ask any of those people, the rules based order didn't exist for them. You guys decided when you want to step in and intervene and take certain people to the International Criminal Court, for example, and then these rules step into play. But when countries are tearing themselves apart.

Richard Engel (15:03)

There weren't that many real rules or fair rules in this so called rules based order that people are nostalgic about.

Yalda Hakim (15:08)

But I think, Richard, what's interesting about the conflict in Ukraine for this part of the world is the lessons that they have taken away. So India has suddenly positioned itself as being aggressive about diplomacy. Prime Minister Modi says it's not the era of war, it's the era of diplomacy. So he goes and he bear hugs Zelenskyy and he bear hugs Putin. And he sort of says, look, let's talk about how we can all come round the negotiating table. So what was interesting is the people who were walking around with their hair on fire are the Europeans currently at this conference. They are the most stressed, they are the most worried that they don't have a seat at the table. So I said to the Norwegians, you don't have a seat at the table.

Richard Engel (15:51)

Even more than the Canadians.

Yalda Hakim (15:53)

Well, the Canadian Prime Minister, I said to him, you know, he's a conservative, Stephen Harper. And I said to him, if you were Prime Minister, do you think your relationship would have been different with Donald Trump? And he's, and he obviously criticized Trudeau and the liberals of his country and he said, look, you don't criticize openly, you know, the President of the United States, especially when, you know, basically that he's thin skinned. You just don't operate that way, do you?

Richard Engel (16:15)

Do, I mean, seen from, from afar. I'm not sure if people realize how absolutely bizarre it is that the United States is picking, that President Trump is picking this fight with Canada. It was always a joke when I was growing up that Canada was, you know, the peaceful neighborhood, had no issues of any kind for 200 years with the United States. And there were comedians. You would see skits on snl, they're like, oh, we better, you know, attack Canada. It was seen as something so far fetched and preposterous that Canada was a threat. And snl, I work for NBC. Snl, Saturday Night Live is on NBC. It's in the building. It broadcasts from the building. I've seen the studio itself. There was an old clip from an SNL comedian, this guy who did a character named Father Guido Sarducci. I don't know if you remember it. It's a great character.

Yalda Hakim (17:12)

I have not seen Father Guido in any. I watch SNL religiously.

Richard Engel (17:16)

This is from an old episode classic. And he plays this Vatican insider and he's always smoking a cigarette and he's dressed in Vatican robes and he's talking about in a ridiculous way, like he gets a huge laugh from the studio audience how the US Needs to invade Canada because Canada's the real threat. This was like 20 years ago. This was always a joke in America because we had the absolute God given benefit of having such a peaceful neighbor. Few countries, as you and I know very well, few countries are blessed with good neighbors. And the US Happened to have a very good one to the north. But, you know, I guess that was.

Yalda Hakim (17:58)

Good enough, you know, to your point that years ago these issues were considered jokes, you know, but speaking to the former Prime Minister of Canada, he said to me, if we're not safe from Donald Trump's tariffs and trade war and war of words, then who is? Is anyone safe? Because we are this kind of friendly neighbor who's always been there, stood with the United States at different turning points and in different conflicts when we had no business to be involved. But we, we did get involved. So the idea of Canada being annexed, Greenland, you know, the, the fact that on these panels we're having conversations about whether Greenland is going to be annexed. And the Norwegian Foreign minister very seriously talking about Article 5 and Article 1 of the NATO agreements and what that means in the event of something like that. I mean, this does feel to them quite dystopian. But what was also interesting, Richard, is as I said, Tulsi Gabbard, Donald Trump's Director of National Intelligence, she was there, she said, she made a speech and she talked about the importance of alliances and partnerships and India's role. And Prime Minister Modi was in the Oval Office just a few weeks ago. And I looked at General Petraeus, who was, you know, star American general, former Director of the CIA. He was sitting next to me and I said, General Petraeus, what's the headline? You know, what did what she say that you thought made a headline? And he said to me, I guess she said, america first is not America alone. But it's not just about the words. Let's see if people put this stuff.

Richard Engel (19:30)

Into practice so people are aware. So this is Tulsi Gabbard. She's the Director of National Intelligence, which was a position created in the United States after 911 because there was the director of CIA, director of FBI, local police departments, justice, etc. Etc. Lots of different security and law enforcement agencies domestically and abroad and after the attacks in New York and Washington. And there was this belief, and rightfully so, that the US Missed something. How could it have happened? There were the warning signs and they weren't, they weren't noticed until it was too late. And this position was created as an sort of ultra intelligence boss who would sit over all of these different intelligence agencies, not necessarily directing them, but making sure that they, well, ultimately having responsibility for them, but not directing them on a day to day basis, but making sure that they communicate, deconflict, centralize. There have been people who've said that this job was unnecessary. And basically bureaucracies do this kind of thing a lot. Whenever there's a failure, they say, oh, let's create a new job whose specific role is to be at the center of all these things. I've spoken to intelligence and security professionals who thinks it's actually more harm than it's worth. But anyway, that's the job. That's her job. And she's been criticized as being a little pro Putin, a little pro Russian in her leaning. So I'm curious at this very international setting where you were, where with everyone from the Canadians to the Norwegians to the Iranians and the Chinese, as sort of India hosts this annual event, what kind of reception did she get, she.

Yalda Hakim (21:17)

Was praised because she's a practicing Hindu as well. And as you say, she's been criticized in the past for showing sympathy to Bashar al Assad, for example, you know, and you know, sort of other claims that she's made as she's, as you said, sympathies towards Russia. So she arrived here as the highest American official from the Trump administration and she thanked Prime Minister Modi for the invitation. She said, he gave me this invitation when he came to the Oval Office just a few weeks ago and I felt I needed to come to India. She talked about being a practicing Hindu and India's role in the world. And I think that really did wonders here. You know, she was on the front pages of every newspaper.

Richard Engel (22:00)

That really endeared her to the world.

Yalda Hakim (22:01)

It really endeared. And the fact that she is a practicing Hindu. She spoke a little bit in Hindi, for example. She did all of those things and sounded incredibly eloquent. Now, when you look between the lines.

Richard Engel (22:13)

Can'T go it alone. We need our friends and alliance.

Yalda Hakim (22:15)

Exactly. We need our friends and allies. Now if you look between the lines, I mean, you know, like all good politicians, she's actually saying nothing. That's why my comment about the headline, what is the headline here? And I guess it was America alone is in America first because, you know, they try and avoid headlines.

Richard Engel (22:29)

So she's a little different than Munich. You know, going back to conferences, we talked about munich. And when J.D. vance went up to Europe and said, you know, you all stink, you have it wrong, you don't know anything about the world and your biggest problem is you're anti Democratic because you fight against right wing parties.

Yalda Hakim (22:46)

Exactly.

Richard Engel (22:47)

A little different message.

Yalda Hakim (22:48)

There's very different message, Richard. We're going to take a, actually a quick break and come back. And when we come back, I want to tell you a little bit more about the conversations around China and the threat it poses because I'm going to pick up on exactly how the mood was different at this conference versus other ones that we've been to.

Richard Engel (23:06)

Sounds good. We'll be right back.

James Matthews (23:17)

Donald Trump is heading back to the White House.

Richard Engel (23:20)

Together, we can truly make America great again. We are in for an unpredictable but fascinating four years.

James Matthews (23:28)

And we're going to be following every twist and turn for the first 100 days. We'll be bringing you the latest updates and analysis first thing every morning. So join me, James Matthews, me, Martha.

Richard Engel (23:39)

Kalnick and me, Mark Stone for Trump.

James Matthews (23:42)

100 every weekday at 6am wherever you get your podcast.

Richard Engel (23:48)

Yalda, A couple of weeks ago, we spoke with Matt Pottinger, and he was talking about China, he was talking about Taiwan, and he was suggesting that the military encirclement of Taiwan by China is kind of in its early phases, that they're starting to increase military activity around Taiwan, that they're starting to cut communications cables around Taiwan. What was, what was the consensus? Or if there was a consensus, what was the discussion around China?

Yalda Hakim (24:23)

Well, Richard, interestingly, I had a panel with all the top generals and admirals dealing with the Indo Pacific. So I spoke to Admiral so Samuel Paparo, he's the commander of the US Indo Pacific Command. And I said to him, let's talk about, let's start by talking about 2027, because, as you know, Richard, and you've been in the region, you've been to Taiwan, you've done a lot of work there. 2027 is the year that Xi Jinping has put as the year that he's asked his military to be ready to take Taiwan by force. Now, I said to Admiral Paparo, is that a deadline and are you working towards deadline?

Richard Engel (25:07)

He said, is that January or is that December?

Yalda Hakim (25:09)

He talked about that. He said, it is a goal, not a deadline. And the closer we get to 2027, the more redundant this statement becomes. And I said, okay, but are you ready in the event of war? And he just gave me a simple answer, yes, we're ready. And I said to him, okay, so say they do make a move on Taiwan. What does it actually look like? Is it a blockade or is it a full SC invasion? And he said, it could be anywhere in between that. So the idea of Taiwan being invaded is something that is top of this administration's agenda. The question is whether they do anything about it. And you could see the, the Philippines was on the panel. The Japanese was on the, they were there as well, the Australians, the, the Indians. And the question that kept coming up was, how much can we still rely on the United States? Because, I mean, even most recently, Donald Trump has said that the security pact between Japan and the United States, it's not reciprocal. We have to protect you. Are you protecting us in the event of war? The Japanese said to me, well, we've got bases. Our job is to ensure that they have these bases in the event of.

Richard Engel (26:22)

War, which is our contribution. They're giving the United States a foothold in the region. It seems like President Trump wants to relitigate everything. If he didn't do it, even if it was done after World War II, he wants to relitigate. What are we getting out of it now? What are we getting? A benefit today that I can show viewers or put in my pocket or whatever. Put in a pocket. Politically, I'm referring to why is it the US in such a rush to tear up everything that it has taken decades to establish, like some military bases or military presence in Japan, military presence in Korea. There's tens of thousands of US Troops in South Korea. President Trump has also talked about those and has been skeptical of them. He's talking about having US Troops in Europe scaled back because President Trump, when you listen to him, he's always talking about American power and how it's. America is going to get what it wants and dominate what it wants because it's so powerful and doesn't need to take advice from anybody else. It's our way or the highway. What was the expression? Get in it or find out what the hell happens to me.

Yalda Hakim (27:33)

I'm going to be beeped again.

Richard Engel (27:34)

I'm going to be beeped. Yes, do it or we're going to mess you up. But it was more vulgar than that.

Yalda Hakim (27:39)

But around and find out.

Richard Engel (27:41)

There it is.

Yalda Hakim (27:42)

There it is.

Richard Engel (27:43)

Thank you. But if you, if the mantra is f around and find out what we're going to do to you, but then you can't also then be pulling back all your troops from bases from Europe, from Asia, from Korea, you know, then you don't have the muscle to have that kind of attitude of, kind of cocksure attitude. You mess with us f around. Find out.

Yalda Hakim (28:04)

The messaging here is that the focus of this administration is the Indo Pacific. It is the threat coming from China. That's why they're trying to move away from other theaters of war like Ukraine.

Richard Engel (28:17)

They were going to pivot to Asia. They were going to pivot to.

Yalda Hakim (28:20)

Obama was going to pivot to Asia in a good way. We don't have to all be superpowers. Trump is pivoting to Asia in a we might be at war way.

Richard Engel (28:29)

At war way. Yeah.

Yalda Hakim (28:31)

Like they see them as China as a formidable power. And the possibility of going to war with China feels very real where I'm sitting right now. You know, Obama was, when he talked about the pivot to Asia was, well, why should we be policing the world? Very much like what Donald Trump is saying. But he was sort of saying there could be more than one superpower in the world.

Richard Engel (28:53)

Both. Both. Both. Because I remember having conversations with people at the White House at the time, and there was, there was this war in Gaza, not this war. There was another war in Gaza. And if you remember, the Muslim Brotherhood had just taken over as the Arab Spring. There was Mohammed Morsi in Egypt. And Hamas, which is an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood, felt very empowered. And there was a pretty serious, much lower level war than there is currently in Gaza. And I remember speaking to top officials, the Obama administration, they were annoyed. They're saying, we don't want to be stuck in the Middle East. We don't want to be focused on this. This is taking up all of our time. We want to be focused in Asia. We want to pivot to Asia for economic opportunities for AI, which was already then sort of on the horizon. They wanted to focus on it because of Chinese containment, because of Taiwan, because of the sort of tremendous wealth and opportunity in that area. They were tired of sort of running around in the sand in the Middle East. But you know what? It never happens because reality intervenes. There's a reality of a hot war here in Ukraine. There's a reality of the Middle East. So I don't know if they're going to get this pivot to Asia. Oh, we want to pivot to Asia. Yeah. But the Middle east always pulls you back. The hot wars you're in always pull you back. Russia always pulls you back. Maybe by design, maybe by accident, there's the Houthis. So for an administration that wants to pivot to war, I think it's got a lot of. There are going to be a lot of distractions that are pulling it the other way.

Yalda Hakim (30:26)

I mean, I don't know if they.

Richard Engel (30:28)

Look, from where I'm perspective, it seems like we're heading not toward Asia. We're heading toward a new conflict in the Red Sea with the Houthis and probably some sort of engagement, military or diplomatic, still in the offing right now with Iran. So I'm not sure they're going to get this pivot to Asia anytime soon.

Yalda Hakim (30:45)

Maybe you know what, what's interesting is?

Richard Engel (30:48)

Or they'll get it when it's too late. Sorry to interrupt you. Now I want to know.

Yalda Hakim (30:51)

Or they'll get it when it's.

Richard Engel (30:52)

It's too hot. They got to go. They're pivoting to Asia because Taiwan is being invaded.

Yalda Hakim (30:56)

And that's why, when I ask Admiral Paparo, are you ready for war? He immediately says yes. The question is, do they have the hardware? Hardware? Do they have the military equipment? And I think what's interesting, what you've just said, from where you're sitting, the worldview is something completely different. And what the focus should be. And from where I'm sitting, it's all China, China, China. We should be worried. The Philippines is saying to me, the Chinese are, you know, got maritime militias here. They're, they're bullying us at sea. They're going to take complete control of the South China Sea. The Americans are saying there's this goal of 2027 to try and take, take Taiwan back by force. The Indians and the Japanese and the Americans and the Australians have formed a thing called the quad, where they're sharing intelligence and they're doing exercises together. So it is quite extraordinary, actually, depending on where you are positioned in the world, that's what you view as the most important thing.

Richard Engel (31:53)

Did you get an impression there, as they're so worried about China, that they are concerned that President Trump is tearing up the alliance structure? Because you'd said earlier that there's certain countries that are quite pleased that this alliance structure is being torn up because it was never very fair, because it was built without what used to be called third world countries, developing countries, non white countries generally established it. So there's quite a few countries who are happy to see it go because it wasn't really built for them anyway, and kind of kept them on the sidelines. I think China feels that way. Russia feels that way. Iran certainly feels that way. But as they're watching China rise out, are they also nervous because this infrastructure was built in order to keep China and Russia, which were communist countries at the time, in a box?

Yalda Hakim (32:50)

Well, it's interesting, it's what we've talked about in the past, Richard, that even though you see these different theaters of war, all these spheres are somehow connected. So whether it's the Russians tapping into militia from the Middle east to come and fight their wars there, whether they're using Iranian shahid drones in Russia, whether they're using North Korean soldiers. And so none of these spheres of influence feel like they are separate from each other, even though the theaters of war feel separate. And here, even in this region, the Admiral Proparo, the, the US from the US Command here in the Indo Pacific, talks about the triangle of trouble. So that's Russia, China, North Korea. You know, they have these phrases, these. And I kept saying to them, I said to him, there's so many.

Richard Engel (33:40)

That's a terrible one. The triangle of trouble.

Yalda Hakim (33:44)

There are all of these phrases that are used. I apologize for him for that One.

Richard Engel (33:49)

At least, is more poetic. Triangle of trouble.

Yalda Hakim (33:53)

Yeah. I mean, they sort of talked about.

Richard Engel (33:55)

Square of doom.

Yalda Hakim (33:58)

Axis of evil. Exactly. But. But yeah, you know, there is concern that China doesn't play by the rules either. And so the Philippines was talking to me about all of their concerns, the Japanese, the, you know, and as well as the Europeans. So whether they like it or not, they may get dragged into this confrontation with the Chinese and they are watching closely from this part of the world.

Richard Engel (34:24)

Anyway, I'm so glad that we had this, this kind of, kind of split screen that I'm yes. Back familiar in Ukraine following this war, which I think is, is tremendously important and transformative for, for the future of Europe, for the future of the sort of world order for the United States, obviously for the future of Ukraine and Russia. But to have you there absorbing all these different perspectives, the other world, the world that is watching and trying to figure out where it's coming next, I think that has been immensely valuable. But my, my question was, or my comment was, a lot of people here believe in Ukraine that President Trump and, and others overestimate Vladimir Putin. They give him too much credit. They say, you know, ah, that President Trump is bending to Putin because Putin is a big power as a nuclear power. And he's in a, again in that, in the debrief that, that President Trump gave, he said, oh, you know, Russia's in so much of a stronger position as if Ukraine is hopeless. It's a charity case. It's a charity case that comes with its begging bowl and you have to help them out because otherwise they would have no shot. Here in Ukraine, when you talk to the soldiers, when you talk to people, they don't feel it's like that. They feel that, that Vladimir Putin is a lot weaker than people understand. People believe that he's running low on ammunition. The fact that he had to go to North Korea to get troops is a sign that he can't mobilize his own population, that he doesn't have as much discretion to just kill Russians at will, sending them off to the front lines as most people think that the mobilization inside Russia is causing domestic pressure. So when you're here, people think why is it that the world is, despite what Ukrainians have shown, the world totally discounts them. And despite all of the weaknesses that Putin has also shown over the course of this conflict, he was almost toppled in a, in a, by a rebel commander who started marching on Moscow. Yevgeny Prigozhin, if you remember that guy, we did a doc on him and he ended it by saying that he wanted to kill me, which was a lot, which was interesting. We have it on, actually.

Yalda Hakim (36:38)

I've seen that documentary, I want to.

Richard Engel (36:39)

Come and strangle you. Which maybe we'll play that clip one time. One time. It was a voice note and he left the guy, only he would respond with a voice note saying, come here and you'll feel my hands on your throat. The ultimate villain. But anyway, this guy was marching toward Moscow and almost got rid of Putin and almost unseated him had he sort of not turned around halfway. So in conclusion, from here, the impression is people always think that Ukraine is a charity case, it can't do anything without Western help, and that President Trump is giving it out of the goodness of giving support, out of the goodness of his heart. And Ukrainians say, you know, you have it all wrong. We're the ones standing up to Russia. We're the ones who could form the core of a future Europe. And we're doing a lot better than you think. And Putin is not 10ft tall.

Yalda Hakim (37:34)

Yeah, well, you know, on that note, before we go, Richard, let's give our predictions and then. Yeah, you go first. You go first.

Richard Engel (37:44)

You go first. It gives me time to think while you're speaking.

Yalda Hakim (37:47)

No, no, I mean, like you say, just sitting here in Delhi having these conversations about what's important to this part of the world, the Indo Pacific, the concerns around a formidable force like China. I will be increasingly wanting to keep an eye on this region and see what these admirals and these generals, when they say they want to ensure that they are prepared, future ready, and whether that's their military hardware or their intelligence keeping an eye on that. That for me is the kind of long term thing that I'll be looking at. In the short term, though, I'm going to also be looking at what's going on in the Middle East. In Gaza, we can see the death toll that we saw just a few days ago in Gaza rise. Hundreds of people were killed. That ceasefire has collapsed. It was already a fragile ceasefire. So whether it can be revived again, how much work is going on behind the scenes for it to not be a full blown conflict yet again?

Richard Engel (38:52)

I'm going to, with my prediction, I'm going to go back as well to, to the Middle east where you are. Everyone wants to pivot to, to Asia, focus on China. And I've seen that before. And the Middle east always gets in the way. The prediction I would have in the short term is Gaza's reignited Houthis are next. Houthis are sort of now on the, the agenda or they're on the, in the, in the crosshairs and that makes logical sense. If you look at this campaign that the US And Israel have been been launching against Iran's proxies. First it was Hamas. Hamas launched the attack. And then there was the counterattack to destroy Hamas, then Hezbollah, Syria. And the one kind of axis that they still have are the, are the Houthis as a weapon that yielded by Iran or held by Iran. So I think the Houthis are on deck and Iran is next.

Yalda Hakim (39:48)

Yeah. Well, it doesn't feel like any of this is any ending anytime soon. We'll obviously be keeping a watchful eye. Richard, really good to see you and thank you to all our listeners for following us and for listening.

Richard Engel (40:00)

Keep listening and it is absolutely our pleasure to help you understand the news and try and get through this crazy world that we're all living in. Galda, great to see you.

Yalda Hakim (40:12)

Good to see you. And goodbye.

James Matthews (40:17)

Donald Trump is heading back to the White House.

Richard Engel (40:20)

Together we can truly make America great again. We are in for an unpredictable but.

James Matthews (40:26)

Fascinating four years and we're going to be following every twist and turn for the first 100 days. We'll be bringing you the latest updates and analysis first thing every night morning. So join me, James, Matthew, me, Martha.

Richard Engel (40:39)

Calneck and me, Mark Stone for Trump.

James Matthews (40:42)

100 every weekday at 6am wherever you get your podcast.