Is it Time for India to Leave BRICS? Conversation W/Jayant Bhandari!

All right, hello everybody and welcome to Geopolitical Trend once again, where truth matters. Excited to be with you as always, but I am even more excited because I got a chance to get a hold of Jayant Bhandari. I consider him a friend and he's always— he's, he's a frequent guest on, on this channel here, so it was kind of him to just carve out time for us. He's busy man, He moves around a lot given his investments and so forth, but he was kind enough to, to join us this afternoon here. So let me bring in Jayant here. Hi, Jayant.

Um, thanks for having me, David Oualaalou.

Of course, it's a treat to have you, man. The whole community is so excited to have you. So for those who do not know who Jayant is, I'm going to provide you a brief bio, but please go to the description in the video and I put a full a bio for Giant there along with his social media links. So Giant advises institutional investors, uh, and also he was a director on the board of Gold Canyon, a publicly listed Canadian company, until its merger with another entity. Earlier, Giant worked for 6 years with the US Global Investors in San Antonio, right here near where I live. So He has written extensively on politics, economics, and cultural issues. So there's a lot of media outlets there. I provide you the link there, guys, for all his, uh, uh, uh, work, and you can, you can check it out there. He has an MBA from Manchester Business School. I'm very familiar with it, in the UK, and also a degree in engineering from SGITS, which is in India. So So welcome, Jahan, let's, let's get into it right away because there is a lot to cover. And I'm going to start with the most bold questions, uh, that many analysts are asking. As BRICS expands, many wonder, is India a good fit for BRICS now?

Well, as David Oualaalou, I talked with you earlier, uh, India is a nobody country. It's an irrelevant country. No one really cares about it. It doesn't really work with other countries anyway because it's an untrustworthy partner for other countries. So India was never a part— a reliable partner for any country. It has no good— it has good relationship with no neighboring country, and all it cares about is its own material benefits. And that is the only guiding principle behind the Indian government and Indian people. But moreover, increasingly the people in the government are very sadistic and power hungry. So BRICS was not going to be of much value because BRICS is primarily China and Russia. And now, uh, given the fact that when Trump said, which I thought was a strange demand, that only US dollar could be used for international trade, Modi gave in right away. They are so scared of everyone because might is right works on, on Indians, and they are very prone to falling for might is right because they don't really have objective standards, objective values to hold on to, or based on which they might, you know, others Other people might say, hey, we might lose some financial benefits, but there are values that we uphold very strongly. But because Indian government holds no value, they very easily give in. But moreover, David, I am an American at heart. America is the country for me. But at the same time, for India, the country is China. India should be the back office of China. India should be trying to get a good relationship with China. But India always compromises that for internal demagoguery. So I would have preferred India to tag along with China the way Mexico and Canada usually tag along with the US.

Yeah. Well, I just won't see India doing that, Janet, because here's the thing, I remember when China rolled the 5G and India was forced to not allow 5G in its country, knowing that that infrastructure is going to improve the economic to a degree conditions inside India. And yet India went ahead and said to China, no, we are not going to allow you to have 5G because the US pressured India.

Yeah, also, also, David, one very important thing is that Indian political class, Indian ruling class does not care about what happens to poor Indians. They actually want Indians to stay poor. And I know it's very strange to foreign, foreign ears, but I literally mean it. They want Indians to be broken. They want Indians to be at the edge of starvation and desperation because People who are at the edge of desperation do not have any courage to revolt, to come to the public square and ask for their rights. Indian economy, for 80% or 90% of people, has been falling for the last 10 years. The average salary, if you remove the top 10-15% of the population, in real terms— not, sorry, not just in real terms, but even in nominal terms— have fallen. So which means that there has been a significant drop in salaries. And yesterday someone was telling me that in his area, a manual worker gets about $1 a day for 12 hours of work. So Indian government prefers people to stay desperate because a desperate population is easily controlled. And they vote for Modi anyway. So it doesn't really matter whether they are rich or poor.

Wow. Well, that's the truth. That's what I've been also— when I talk to some people who are are in the know regarding what's going on in India. You mentioned earlier, uh, Giant, that India does not have good relations with its neighbors. And, and one thing that came to my mind has to do with the Himalayan issue regarding Ladakh with China. Why is this issue not being resolved, mainly from India's part?

Well, I, I really think India should, uh, unconditionally surrender to China. Uh, now I know it, it sounds traitorous to be saying this. I'm eventually still an Indian. Yeah, the problem is that, uh, Indian armed forces lack the capabilities to fight with China anyway. Uh, now just a couple of months back, a very strange thing happened, and it was baked in the cake. It— for people who are in the know knew about it. India was flying certain drones at the border over Ladakh, and the drone actually started moving towards Pakistani-controlled area and moved in under and became— came under control of Pakistan. Now, it was obvious why it moved in there, because the chips and the software used in that drone come from China. Now this is absolutely ridiculous. If you don't have control over your hardware and software, particularly the software, all your fighter planes' communication systems will break down when China wants to defeat you. And there's a very well-known Indian guy, Praveen Sawhney. He wrote a book called The Last War. It's a very interesting read. I'm not promoting him. I'm not necessarily— I don't even know him. But he wrote a very good book in which he talks about how a war with China will very likely end before it gets started. The reason is that China can freeze Indian communication systems, Indian software and hardware, and hack into the systems right away, basically breaking up the Indian Armed Forces into isolated atomized part. Um, now, uh, so given the, the, the, the, the situation with the Indian Armed Forces, India should just surrender because they can't win a war. But moreover, this issue with Ladakh is something that should be sorted out by sitting on two sides of the table. But Indians are totally incapable of sitting on a table and negotiating. And for internal demagoguery, Modi, and not just Modi, but earlier governments as well, which meant that opposition governments as well, routinely said that they would not give away an inch of our land. Now, what is an inch of our land? Do you really know that thin line that separates the two countries? No one really knows. You have to really sit down and negotiate and come to a peaceful settlement. Indians are unprepared for it. And for China, the road from Tibet to Xinjiang is very important. They can't compromise on that land. And that passes through the— what India considers to be under a part of India. Now, this is a no man's land. This is a massive desert. So historically, when it was under the British control, I think it was very likely just a no man's land. No one really cared about that area. And I think India and China should have sat down together to sort out a peaceful settlement rather than China having to use its armed forces and, you know, kill a lot of Indian soldiers and its own soldiers as well. In 2020, just 4 or 5 years back, there was this brutal fight between India and Chinese forces, and a lot of Indian soldiers died. And now these are among the best people from India. So we are putting for wasteful purposes some of the best talents, some of the best Indians for no good.

Well, I do believe, and correct me, Janet, if I'm wrong, I do believe that China is willing to sort of sit down and have a sort of direct conversation with the Indians regarding this issue. And as a matter of fact, I did ask when I was in China, I asked some, that's not political, but it's just to ask, I said, Will it be ever a possibility for Chinese government to sit down with India and fix this issue of the border once for all? And I was told yes, but it's the Indian side that is not willing to do so.

That's what I was told. Yeah, because firstly, uh, the moment they give an inch of India, the so-called India's land to China, The opposition parties will start saying that India has surrendered. But in the meantime, China has taken over a massive chunk of India already. An Indian Prime Minister has no courage to admit it. Now the satellite photographs show that within the Indian areas, the so-called Indian areas, and I don't, you know, I'm in no position to claim to say whether those are Indian areas or Chinese areas. The satellite pictures show that China has been building villages and, uh, military positions in those areas. So India has given away those areas anyway. Why not just sit down and peacefully, peacefully sort things out the way Finland and Russia once did, or France and Germany once did? Just create a line where— which you would agree to honor because then you would save, save so much of emotions and so much of money going into armed forces which benefit no people.

Well, speaking of money for the military, it is my knowledge, and if I don't know if the last number I figured and I checked it, that India increased its defense to about $71 billion. So Could it make more sense if it will invest that money in infrastructure when poverty is still high in India, unemployment is high, roads, you know, bridges are crumbling and so forth? The infrastructure is so weak. Wouldn't it make more sense for them to invest, for Modi to invest that money in infrastructure rather than defense?

Well, I wouldn't even say that India should spend on infrastructure because these days Uh, infrastructural companies are required to pay 50% of the revenue in bribes. So the proportion of bribes that go to bureaucrats and politicians have gone up drastically, um, and this infrastructure gets washed away after a single rain. Uh, some of the best-known roads, highways in India get washed away after a single rain. So it's disastrous for the country because we are creating an environmental legacy that cannot be corrected in the future. Once you have constructed all these washed away roads, they will be a maintenance headache and you won't have the money to provide that maintenance. So I am against building up too much of infrastructure because, because of the environmental and financial future consequences. But moreover, David, one big thing is that this construct— road construction companies have— are basically mafias. And they are in OG, and I'm not going to say bad, I'm going to say OG, because this is just a very complex, very intimate relationship between the mafia, the bureaucrats, the police, and the politicians, which means that the mafia in many provinces now has direct control over the police and the bureaucrats. They call up the local police and say, hey, you do this thing, go and kill this guy in encounter killing. That's how. So the secondary consequences are even worse, which is that the mafia, money-minded mafia, which cares about nothing and has no honor, is taking— has taken over bureaucracy and politician as a result of too much of money going into infrastructure. I'm not going to say it's an investment. Because 50% of that is bribes and 50% of that gets washed away after a single rain.

Wow, wow. Well, a lot of Indian people deserve to know the truth. So I don't think so.

Well, they— Indians know the truth. Indians know the truth. But Indians are truly, David Oualaalou, among the most sheepish people. They never fight. They never fight for their rights. They never come out on the street asking for, better rule of law, unlike what everyone else in the world does. Actually, Indians come on the road for only one thing, which is their tribal reasoning, which is in Hindu-Muslim craziness, building temples when there are plethora of temples, or figuring out that certain mosques might have been temples, which no one can prove. But then the Supreme Court and the politicians go along and you know, it creates a lot of social tension. So Indians fight for negative reasons rather than positive reasons. Wow.

Wow. I have one more thing regarding this topic before we jump to something else here. Now, uh, when it comes down to this BRICS, the way I see it, uh, giant, moving forward, the BRICS now is moving towards establishing the financial independence from the dollar. Now, if India stays in BRICS, it will undermine that process. Would I be wrong to say it would be better for BRICS to make a decision now before they get to that point?

Absolutely. Yeah, absolutely. And, you know, that is why you should not— no one really wants to involve India in any organization, any international organization, Because India, firstly, because Indians don't have a value system, they don't know which side to take. They don't know whether to side with Russia or side with Ukraine or side with the USA. Oh, they are friends with Iran, they are friends with Israel. Now, of course, they are so-called friends. They are friends with Russia and at the same time they're friends with the USA. So they, firstly, they have no value system. They will be friends with whosoever helps them out materially. Um, and, uh, so, so that is the basic program running in their minds. Now, as a participant in BRICS, they know that India will backstab other countries when the time comes and will not stand its ground if it sees itself losing materially. And it already has done that. It has already accepted that it will give in to dollar hegemony. Now, you know, I am reasonably pro-Trump, but I thought this requirement for countries to be a follower of dollar hegemony was absolutely outrageous. Who is Trump and the US to tell other countries which currency to use for their own purposes? So I don't like this dollar hegemony. I am American at heart, but I I don't want to insist on something that is inappropriate. But India gave in right away because it's so timid. They have no value structure to keep their spine straight. They actually don't have a spine.

To those who just joined us, you are listening to Jayant Bhandari. He's an investor. He's been around the block, as we say. So someone who knows what he's talking about. I admire you, Jayant, for being straightforward regarding where you see things. And, and again, when I— and I make it clear also on my side regarding where I see India in BRICS. I never believe India is carrying any weight inside BRICS. India is a dead weight in BRICS. And I've, I've already made my position clear, and I've been talking about— has nothing to do with India itself, meaning something against India. I have actually— I know people from India wonderful human beings, but the conditions where they are is what led me to say what I said. So, and that's what I, what I stand. So let's move on to another domain here within, uh, I'm sure you heard what took place recently with the Deepseek AI that China launched, and it revolutionized. It puts the Silicon Valley sort of, uh, it really exposed now the inability, uh, of Silicon Valley to compete. Now, here is where my concern is, uh, uh, Giant, and please correct me if I'm wrong. I read some Western publications stating that India is calling itself the center for artificial intelligence, and I have the links and I have everything. I will post it for you guys. Is there any truth to this?

Well, the, the first question that comes to my mind is how many H-1B visas China had to issue to develop Deepseek? And the answer you and I both know is zero. Zero. Now, India is really a crazy place, David. When I was a child, I remember that Indian government decided that it wanted to invent television, the television by itself. Now, televisions were all around the world, but India wanted to develop from top down its own television. India has been working on a fighter plane for the last, I think, 5 decades now. They have spent a massive amount of money on it, but the plane now, despite that it uses French engines, it uses British, you know, it has components from all over the world, still it fails to fly. It is an unreliable fighter plane. So that is the situation with Indian technology. Indian manufacturing continues to fall over the last 3 decades. Now I know this sounds strange, but just go to World Bank's website and look for Indian manufacturing as a percentage of GDP. It is— it has fallen to 13%, which is the lowest ever. No country in the world has grown without a manufacturing base unless it was a super skilled country like Hong Kong or or Singapore. So given that situation, that puts into perspective where Indian technology is all about. Now, tell me one thing, one, you know, even something like Twitter or TikTok that India has created, just a simple app thing, because now it is believed that Indians are prime movers of the software industry. You can't tell me a single app or a single system that India has designed, like Facebook, Twitter, very basic things. Now, though, the reason they, they claim that they want to do space exploration or AI is for internal demagoguery. It has no useful purposes. India has allocated ₹5 billion Indian rupee Now, when we hear about billions and trillions, our minds get all confused and we think, well, ₹5 billion Indian rupees and now India is going to lead the show. But what does ₹5 billion Indian rupee mean? It means $57 million. Now, with $57 million, you can't do anything. You can't even start one unicorn if you wanted to, because $57 million, And this is at a national level. But moreover, most of this money will get frittered away in bribes. They will steal absolutely everything. And in that institutional environment, can you tell me, David Oualaalou, what— which professional person would want to work in that kind of institution? And I absolutely guarantee you zero, because a good professional guy, irrespective of what his field is, even if it's only science and all he cares about is science, will not want to work in a company like that because he knows that he will face bureaucratic and corrupt pressures all the time, and he has an opportunity to work in the US and, or maybe, you know, try to seek out something in Japan or China. So this is, uh, none of these things ever happen. But let me go back on something else for just a second, if you don't mind.

Sure.

India is known as advertised by the international media as having put this, you know, having sent the rocket to the moon, southern pole of the moon. Now, what was the purpose of it, David? No one knows what the purpose was. Was it a technical achievement? My response is no, it wasn't, because virtually everything, including the concept, comes from the Western society. The chips and most of the parts of that rocket comes from the West because India cannot create chips that can— I doubt if India has any chip industry really even today, but it cannot really create chips that can face the high temperature of the space. Now, the moon mission cost India $75 million. Now, again, it looks— sounds like a huge number. $75 million. But what does it translate into? It translates into 5 American cents every Indian. 5 American cents every Indian. It's, it's not a material expense for India. And India, instead of building toilets, or instead of building infrastructure, a proper infrastructure, pumped water for people, proper sewage, cleaning up the rivers, which would call, which would require hundreds of billions of dollars, It's so much easy to invest that money for internal demagoguery by sending a moon mission which costs only 5 cents per Indian. Now the question is, why does UK or France not do the same thing? The reason is that for UK to do the same thing, it would cost a dollar per British. And the British government, despite that I don't like it, is aware enough that they should not be wasting a dollar each person, even though it's a rich country. But India being a poor country where maybe half the population goes to sleep hungry, does not care about stealing 5 cents from these wretched, poor, hungry people's pockets. But here is the next problem that comes from the same thing. These things impresses the Indian middle class. And that also shows the quality of Indian middle class that they are so emotional, They're so irrational, and they don't really care about the poor people. Now, what I have seen traveling around the world is that when the middle class becomes richer, it becomes more socially aware. Indian middle class, when it becomes richer, it becomes even less socially aware. And that is why I have a very negative view of the future of India. Wow.

Well, this is why I wanted to bring this point out, because I noticed that main, as I said, main Western media outlets, even some Indian locations, and I checked some, and all arguing that India is rapidly positioning itself as a global AI hub, leveraging its unique advantages in solar power and the generation, vast talent pool and so forth. But reality suggests otherwise. And that was one of the reasons why I wanted to get your take into all this. This leads me to—

Western media people, Western journalists are truly naive, David Oualaalou. They shock me no end. They are almost puerile. They have no understanding of local cultures and they fall for propaganda of their governments rather than really do the the ground research work on these countries. All you have to do to understand India is to walk over to a couple of Indian government offices to get some work done or go 5 kilometers outside center of Delhi and you will learn everything I'm telling you. Every single Indian bureaucrat and politician thinks about only one thing, which is what is in there for him. Which means how he can extract the most bribes from you. And that drives all AI excellence centers, that drives all military budgets, military decisions. Everything is driven by how much bribe they can— how can they maximize a bribe collection. And that is why I call the Indian government bribe collection agency.

Wow, that's quite a description, Jayant, but it's the truth. I had some viewers even from India. I remember one, and he told me, I am from India. He said, what Giant is saying is true. So it's the truth matters, and people don't like it. Some in India don't like it. Well, that's too bad. There's nothing we can do about that. Now, this leads me to ask you, within this realm, uh, Giant, about investments in, in, in, in India, even though the government's saying We are attracting more investments. The recent one was Altman, the guy who's involved in software, whatever. Why are Indians worshiping the guy when they know they're not going to invest in India? BYD last time asked India to pay the 50% first before they will deliver the electric buses, but India kind of told them, no, no, no, you deliver the buses and we'll pay you later. And BYD said, no, you pay first, then we'll deliver. Is this means now that investments is dry up completely in India?

Well, I don't know when it was not dry. Investments don't come to India. Right now Volkswagen is fighting a case against Indian government because its revenue, I think, in India was just over $2 billion in 2024, it has been asked to pay a tax of $2.9 billion, if I'm not incorrect. So Indian government is asking it to pay a tax more than what was the revenue of Volkswagen in India, which I think— I'm sure you will agree— is absolutely outrageous. So India has always been a desert. I don't even know where— why you are asking that question, because India never gets any investments. Do you know the percentage of FDI that goes into India? That is 2.5% of the FDI that goes around the world. Only 2.5% for a country that has the most population in the world. That represents close to 1 out of 20% of the world's population, and supposedly the fastest growing economy, which completely is a complete lie in my view. And I have talked with you about this in the past, but India has never been an attractive destination. I advise my clients mostly not to waste their time and energies on, on India because India becomes a distraction for every company, company because it creates so many problems. Now, Indian manufacturing, as I said, is only 13% and falling. And David, we talked about it, I think, last year or last to last year on this subject. When supposedly the Western companies were going to move from China to India. None of that has happened. Have you heard of any company that moved its manufacturing operation to India? The only company you might say moved to India was, uh, Apple, uh, but, uh, that is not a manufacturing operation, that's an assembly operation. That's a very— that's a one-off assembly operation. And my view is that it came into existence primarily because India required them to assemble iPhones in India to enable Apple to start selling their products in India, because Apple could not sell their cell phones in India. So I think it's more of a matter of convenience for Apple that it was able to bear the extra cost of assembling in India, because In India, everything becomes very expensive despite the seemingly low costs. So they, they did their back-of-the-envelope calculation, probably that, hey, we are going to lose a few billion dollars in the so-called assembling center, but we will make that up by selling iPhones in India, which we otherwise cannot.

Wow. Well, with all this, uh, uh, giant, what, what, what does Modi need to do to improve the lives of the average Indian citizen? Literally, what does he need to do?

Uh, well, he doesn't want to improve the life of an average citizen. That's not the criteria he lives by. Um, he's a street-side goon. He is mostly an idiot in my view. Actually, he is an idiot. Um, he, um, uh, I mean, have you, David, have you ever heard him giving a proper press conference? No, he never takes any questions from anyone. Over the last 3, uh, 10 years, he has managed 2 or 3 scripted interviews, scripted interviews. So he never takes questions from the audience. He has no intelligence to understand India's affairs. He's more like a street-side goon from what I see. He doesn't care about India. He just wants to win the next elections. And when he wins the next elections, he wants to win the elections that comes thereafter. So he's always in canvassing mode. That's what he does. He— all he does is internal demagoguery. He does not care about India. India is becoming a very ugly society right now. It's becoming very poor. The divide between the rich and the poor is increasing, and the rich are becoming rich not because they are adding value. They are becoming rich because they are politically connected and are sort of agents of bribe collection for the politicians and the mafia. So they are becoming rich, the poor are becoming poor, and the tension, the regional tension, all kinds of stresses developing, social stresses developing in India. The divide between Hindu and Muslims is increasing. So Modi is a catalyst enabling all those problems for the future of India. So if he seizes all this divide and rule kind of policies, India would improve. But the problem is that he is doing everything that is worsening the country, and whosoever comes after Modi will be worse than Modi. So unfortunately, there's nothing that can be done about India.

So will it be, uh, will I be wrong to say in my assessment that can we consider India a failed state?

Uh, it was, you know, in a way never a state. India is a very divided country. Nothing works. No two organizations work properly. They are all bribe collection centers. Indian businesses don't think in terms of creating value. And Indian businesses make money only thinking that they are transferring money from your pocket to their pocket. That's how they think. Now, any value that ends up getting created is incidental. It's not a focus of any business in that country. And that is what happens to people who spend 90-95% of their time bribing and wining and dining bureaucrats and politicians. So the way your mindset develops in engaging in that environment is to just make money because you really can't care about the society when most of your time you are spending in harming Indians by using bribes and connections as a mechanism to survive. And then you only care about making money. So India is not just a failed state, it was never a state. Nothing works in that country. The only reason it doesn't fall apart is because the US provides Pax Americana. I feel David Oualaalou or relatively safe in India, not because of the Indian police or the Indian government who are brutal, who are spineless but is still brutal. And most brutal people are very spineless people. I feel relatively safe because of the Canadian government and because of the American government. Because when they do something outlandish, Western governments come out to remind these, these, these autocratic, spineless, brain-dead rulers of the third world countries to calm down and, and restrict their tyranny a bit. But at the end of the day, India will fall apart the way, you know, Bangladesh did. Bangladesh is actually still a better country than India is. Has a higher GDP per capita. And Bangladeshis and Pakistanis have— despite that they are just another version of Indians, they are Indians, but they still have some vague notion of fighting for their rights. And that's why you see more headline news about violence in those countries. But in my view, that is for the right reasons. Indians are too sheepish. So India, for all practical purposes, is worse than Pakistan and Bangladesh. And I really mean it, India has done worse than Pakistan over the last 75 years except for the last one decade. So India will fall apart, David, visually as well eventually. But right now it looks like a stable country only because Indians are too sheepish to fight for their rights.

Well, I remember a few months ago when Mr. Wani the foreign minister of China met with the, the foreign minister of Bhutan, uh, and, and I think they wanted to establish— it's not they want to, they already established diplomatic, uh, exchanges and so forth between Bhutan and China, and India got pissed because it's a neighbor. To me, it was like, well, wait a minute, who gives you the right or the authority to decide for what other countries wants to do with others? So I kind of was confused about the behavior of India regarding that matter?

Well, India bosses around every single country. Uh, the only Hindu country on the planet is Nepal. Uh, Nepal should be closely attached to India, but eventually Nepal got tired of the bullying by India and it gave in. It moved towards the Chinese side. Uh, Maldives did the same thing. Uh, Pakistan of course is a very close ally of China. It should have been a close ally of India. Actually, Bangladesh was the only country until recently which was close to India, but Indian government did only one thing, which was to establish a relationship with Hasina. Apart from that, all they did was to antagonize Bangladeshis. So you can't really develop a relationship with another country by only engaging with one politician. You have to have the society to society engagement to create a relationship. But India did not do it. So as a leftover, the only country left that is relatively a better friend of India is Bhutan. But Bhutan is forced into a good relationship with India because close to 40 to 50% of everything that happens in Bhutan comes from India. India provides electricity, India provides gas, fuel, everything to Bhutan. And this came into existence because when, when China was going through the Cultural Revolution and all the crazy things that were happening in China, Bhutan probably thought that India would be a better country to ally with. But now my guess is that Bhutan wouldn't be— would want to move towards China, but just because it's so badly stuck with India that it It is sort of stuck, but eventually it will go as well because Indians cannot give up the habit of bullying whosoever they can. Again, remember the one or two rules that drive the Indian mind. Indian government's mind is might is right and maximizes of resource acquisition and mostly maximizing resource acquisition for their own purposes, which is personal bribe collection. They don't even care about the country.

Wow, you, you brought up Sheikha Hassina. I remember reading somewhere that, uh, it was the Indian government that provided a safe passage to Sheikha Hassina.

She is living in India.

Yeah, so I was like shocked and surprised at that, given the bribe that was Sheikha Hassina involved in regarding with her some family members or something like that. And they all end up in, in India. But that was surprising to me. Now, now, while I'm thinking about it, uh, President Trump most likely is planning a trip to India. What do you expect the purpose of that trip, Jaya?

Well, I, I don't know if Trump is coming to India anytime soon. I think the, the earliest he will come to India is in September. But as we speak, Modi's packing his bags to go to Washington. He is in Washington later this week or early next week to grovel, genuflect, prostrate in front of Trump. And the problem is that Modi is being humiliated currently as America said deports Indians under chains, the illegal people who came to the US. There are apparently close to a million illegal Indians living in the US. So India is going to face massive amount of humiliation as these deportees are chained and handcuffed and put on American military planes and sent back to India. Also, there's a trade war going to erupt at some point of time. There's a fear in India because India has a trade surplus with America when India has a massive trade deficit otherwise. So, um, uh, Trump quite rightly wants India to balance its trade relationship with India. Um, and, uh, Modi is in a precarious situation right now because Indian economy is failing, uh, and, uh, all these deportees will humiliate Indians no end. Also, Modi apparently tried to kill an American citizen who was, of course, of Indian origin. But Modi— it seems that the Indian government tried to kill one person, which is under investigation. Then there is this Adani case which is being investigated by the American, um, the, the New York, uh, attorney, uh, because of bribery in India. Now, of course, every company in India bribes, but because Adani raised money in the US, they are now under the American law. So all these things are creating problems for Modi. And Modi wants to portray to Indians that, again, internal demagoguery, that India is such an important country that among the first visitors Trump want to see is Modi. But the reality, David, is that Modi is desperate. Modi is under— has been cornered, and Trump is basically asking him to come over to Washington to prostrate, to grovel, to genuflect. And if you go back to late December last year, which is just about one and a half, a few weeks before the inaugural of Trump, Indian Foreign Minister was stationed in Washington. Now, can you imagine he, if he was there to talk with, negotiate with Biden anything? No, he was sitting outside the office of Trump apparently to get an invitation for Modi, uh, for the inaugural ceremony. Uh, Trump did not invite Trump, uh, did not invite Modi. Trump invite Xi Jinping. Now this for Indian mind is an extremely humiliating thing, but now, uh, And, you know, even more humiliating and embarrassing is begging for invitation. Now, David, if you host a cocktail party and you don't invite me, I'm not going to give you a call and say, hey David, can you please add me to the list? Hey, if you don't invite me, you don't invite me. Forgive and forget, move on. I mean, it's even more humiliating to be asking to be invited. And that was so— I was cringing for Modi, but they are shameless people. They only believe in internal demagoguery. So yes, Modi is coming to the US in a, in a few days, but that is to prostrate and genuflect and, uh, grovel.

Wow, wow, wow, wow. And this is why, guys, I, when I reach out to Jayant, I know it will be— you will be hearing, hearing what matters the most in understanding especially what's coming out of India or what's going on in India, because most of the media inside India, at least based on what I read, and I do read some, they just providing some, some picture that doesn't exist regarding the strength of the economy and so forth. And all this has nothing to do, has no basis in the truth or the reality. And Jayant provide us some sort of the argument for why that is. I want to move on, Janet, if I may, to— and I didn't highlight this to you earlier— regarding the tariffs that President Trump imposed now on Canada and Mexico and China. Of course, for Canada and Mexico, it has been taken out by about 30 days, then they're gonna assess all that. But that's not what I want to focus on. What I want to focus on and get your opinion, Janet, is How do you think this kind of policy will end up impacting the global economy writ large?

Well, I, so I, you know, I'm not an insider to these decision-making. I really think that America needs to stop inflow of so many people into the country, which is actually leading to employment crisis in the US. For example, I mentioned about— it was a tongue-in-cheek comment about Deep Seek about H-1B visas, whether China needs H-1B visas. And now American media promotes that America cannot do without Indian H-1B employees. The reality is no, Americans can do the job themselves. And Indian H-1B only do one thing, which is to reduce the salaries of the Native Americans. So I think some of those things need to be corrected. There is a drug-related problem in America that needs to be corrected. I don't know how, how much Canada and Mexico are responsible for all these things. Maybe Mexico is more responsible because it's allowing passage to people from Central America to come to Mexico and move into the US. But I don't even know how Canada is, uh, is responsible for it. Uh, but, um, in general, David, uh, uh, people around the world have piggybacked on America for so many things. Uh, and American citizens have to, uh, subsidize the world for, uh, Pax Americana, for example, and so many other things. Added with that, of course, is the problems American involvement creates. But I think I'm not necessarily an insider. I think some of these things need to be doing. So I retain a relatively pro-Trump worldview right now, except that I was really shocked when he talked about America taking over Gaza, or when he said American dollars must be a hegemonic currency. I thought those were very strange claims, if not repulsive.

Yeah, yeah, I did read that. As a matter of fact, I just talked to someone who used to be in Washington regarding the statement by President Trump about taking over Gaza. That's a violation of international law, and president or not, he should abide by what the international law says. And we can't just take over a land that doesn't belong to us. It's, it's just not right, but that's how Trump is. So now this leads me to address one last, uh, topic here before I let you go, uh, Janet. It's, uh, it has to do again about our, uh, key topics here for India. India and Quad— my concern with that, and I am starting to get the feel, and please correct me if I'm wrong, I am starting to get the feel that Quad is going to be pushing India over the cliff.

Well, so firstly, David Oualaalou, Quad is believed to be a security alliance between India, Australia, Japan, and the US. The reality is, if you look at what Quad has been doing over the last two decades, is that they have supposedly participated in natural disaster, disaster relief, or collecting maritime data, are mostly peacetime activities. They have not been a security alliance necessarily. There's already a security alliance between Australia, Japan, and the US. The problem is Quad does not work because there is an irrelevant, uncommitted party in that system, which is India. Uh, India wants security for itself, but it does not want to provide security to anyone and will backstab you when the time comes. It's already associated with Russia anyway. It also has a very good relationship with Iran. So America, Japan, and Australia have to wonder if India is a reliable partner in a security alliance But moreover, India will not participate in becoming a security partner because while India wants security, or Modi would claim to want security, the problem is they are too afraid of China. China, for China, India becoming a part of a security alliance with the US is similar to Ukraine becoming a NATO partner. So, uh, China— for, for that, their China has a red line. Now, I don't know if China should influence what India does, uh, because it's, uh, it's a sovereign matter. But Indians are so— Indian government is so spineless and unprepared for everything. But also India knows it subliminally that, uh, America, Australia, and Japan treat India as a non-entity, which means that at the end of the day, all these countries, once they have a relationship with China back on foot, uh, they will, uh, prefer to move towards China rather than, uh, be stuck with an irrelevant non-entity, uh, called India.

Yeah, well, because where with China— where China is economically speaking, I mean, it carries weight. As a matter of fact, uh, I did read that, uh, uh, about 70 32% of the output from within BRICS comes from China alone. So that just tells you.

Yeah, the funny thing is that if you look at the international trade, India provides only 2% of merchandise trade to the world, only 2%. Its service trade, which is supposed to be a big, supposed to be big according to the media's claim, is only 4.6% of the international trade. So even though India's, uh, pride supposedly comes from services trade, it is actually only 4.6%. But also remember, so many of Indians go to work as maids and servants in Israel, in Singapore, in Dubai, elsewhere in the Middle East, as construction workers, and as copy and paste software workers in the US. They are not creative, innovative people in the US. And the— to, to address that, you should always ask, what is a single product that India created or Indians living in, in the US created? They are administrators. They might be CEOs, but they are administrators. They are not spearheading creative, uh, goals of America.

Wow. And by the way, Jayant, what I'm thinking about, this is something different here. How much the caste system, does it still exist in India? And how much is it impacting society in India?

Well, yeah, I mean, caste system is of course there and it will always be there because it's the part of every cell and every tissue of Indians. For Indians, the what other people think of themselves. The, the superficial aspects are the most important things. Uh, if you look at matrimony advertisements in newspapers, it still asks for whether you are a fair color, fair-skinned or not. Skin color is extremely relevant for Indian, for the Indian mind. Indian mind goes for the superficial exterior things, Indian prospective Indian brides' parents will invariably ask you how much bribes you collect. They don't connect bribery with anything negative. In fact, bribery, being able to collect bribe is a matter of honor for virtually everyone. So, so the caste system is very much a part of Indian thinking. But moreover, it's It's not just the caste system, it's everyone. Well, virtually every Indian is sizing you up. And when he has a discussion with you, he wants to know your religion, your caste, how much you earn, what kind of family you have, what education you had. So they want to size you up so that— because Indian mind either grovels in front of someone or wants the other person to grovel. There's always a submissive and oppressive relationship. And when it comes to Indians, so caste system is just a superficial facade of it, but there's a lot behind it, uh, that they are always trying to size you up. But moreover, uh, the most of the caste conflicts are actually the lower caste conflicts, the, the two lowest class. You know, when you hear about any caste-related problems in India It is usually two bottom of the caste system groups fighting with each other to, to work out supremacy between them. So most of the caste problem is related with the lowest class caste, and that is why caste problem is unsolvable anyway. But the larger problem of India is that it is an atomized country where everyone is trying to size you up. Because of your position, your power, your financial status.

I, I don't think so. In the West, we understand— I don't, I don't claim to know. That's one of the reasons why I wanted to ask you, giant. You, you'll be a better source.

And that is why I trust—

I trust you. I trust you.

Yeah, that is why, uh, you know, I, uh, when, when I look at Palo Alto, where there are a lot of Indians who are probably among the best-paid people in the, in, in the US. I still call it a ghetto, uh, because mostly when people think about ghetto, they think about, uh, very poor people living, uh, in bad situations. But you can still be a cultural ghetto, which means that you never assimilate. And because Americans don't understand the caste system, they don't really understand the kind of people they are bringing into the US. By giving them H-1B visas or whatever else. And these are the people who will never assimilate because the caste system is an inherent part of their thinking. The hierarchical system, the sizing the other person up, is an inherent part of their thinking. And that is why, you know, there was this court case to do with Cisco in which people claimed that they were being oppressed because of their caste in California, which is outrageous. So the caste system never leaves India, and the whiners still whine. So the oppressors are there, but the whiners are also there, which is the supposedly lower caste. Instead, you know, they could have easily moved on to working with European people who would have no clue about the caste system to oppress the lower caste Indians, but they still prefer to work with Indians because, uh, and yeah, you know, this is, this is, uh, the, the Indian, uh, the human emotional side, uh, where people prefer to be oppressed as well. So again, they, you know, I am again with Trump there, that immigration needs to be seriously controlled because you are very likely, you are actually bringing in people who culturally will never assimilate.

Yeah, well, that is, that is one of the reasons why I actually, as a matter of fact, uh, giant, I just read recently that the parliament in India passed some legislation regarding divorce and women inheritance or something like that. So my thinking was, are they trying to sort of change the system? Or I don't know, I just read this one, just wanted to—

this cannot be changed by regulatory means. You have to create social awareness. Christian missionaries and British colonizers worked on bringing a bottom-up change in that country for 3 centuries, and they could hardly make a dent in that corrupt— what I would call corrupt system, but that is inherent to India— system. So no, it is— you can't make a regular regulatory change. But though whenever India does anything, David, you should always assume that even those things that look good are designed to maximize collection of bribes. So the reason Indian regulations have become increasingly more pro-women is not because they want to protect women. It is because virtue signaling is easy when you are pro-women. If you are Kakish, and I'm using the word Kakish because that's probably the best word for this purpose, you prefer to be pro-women. You also know that if you create pro-women laws, police will be very happy because the path to collecting bribes becomes lubricated. A lot of men now die of suicide in that country because women can walk into any police station and claim whatever. You know, they might even claim that they got— a woman might claim that she got raped in a bus full of passengers, uh, but the— and the police will arrest the man not because they should, but because they can— the pro-women law allow them to, and they can then collect bribes, and a judge can then collect bribes, and they can all virtue signal while, uh, being, uh, uh, a fox in a sheep's clothing. But, wow, yeah, and, and Indian women, uh, will claim sexual assault irrespective of whether it happened or not. So pro-women laws have created this unfair system in the country. And my thinking, looking at what I know, and I know a lot of things very closely, um, most of the rape cases and dowry cases filed with the police in India are very likely fake. Most of the dowry and the real dowry and the real rape cases never get filed. Because police will refuse to accept those cases. So it's all about who gives the bribes, and the patchworking doesn't work. It is creating more problems for the India— for Indians, because India could not have conceived of the institutions and the regulatory framework that the British left behind. Any patchwork you do will create more problems than solutions. So I would basically let those regulations the way they are rather than change them.

Wow, that's, that's very disturbing, Jayant.

So I might want— I might want to just add one last thing. When I was in the university, I refused to befriend people from the lower caste. Listen to me again. I refuse to have any kind of relationship with the lower caste people. Why? Because a lower caste person could go to the police station and file any crazy report against me. And the police would not have required any evidence to arrest me. So I wouldn't— so the best thing would be not to befriend lower caste people, because you could see, get into some serious trouble. And the police would, of course, only be looking for bribes. And this is universal to India. Every Indian bureaucrat is after bribes. So by doing this patchwork, to remove the caste system, India created a system in which a person like me who actually did not know about the caste system because I went to a Catholic school and my family does not know about it either. We, uh, I ended up becoming a casteist in the university because I saw a clear danger in having a relationship with someone from the lower caste.

Wow. That's very interesting. By the way, guys, uh, just for you to know, Jayant runs a yearly philosophy seminar in Vancouver, Canada, that is. And the topic on that— it's not India— is capitalism and morality, just for you guys to know. And I, and I did put it in the, in the, uh, in the description there. So I got a last question, uh, Jayant, before I let you go. I know the community is so excited to be here. We got like probably over 3— I think over 5,000 lives watching this, just, just to let you know. That's how much— that's how much the community likes you, Giants, because they want to hear the truth. And you know, in, uh, in, in, uh, in this channel, it is all about the truth. You say it as it is. People are, you know, they are adults. They can They can take the information and decide for themselves. So now here's my last question pertaining to the overall topic regarding whether India needs to be out of BRICS because it doesn't carry much weight there. So if you are, if you are given a chance to nominate a country to be replacing India, which one would you suggest? In your opinion, based on what that country can add to the economic, the financial, the investments, opportunities, and so forth?

Um, it's hard to say. I think, uh, in my view, the US dollar hegemony will stay. China is— I'm a big fan of China. I will be in China 7 days from now. I love that country. I absolutely relish the changes happening in that country. Most of the time, China feels like the US to me— wide roads, good infrastructure, everything working. So I quite like China, but I don't see it as taking over the US dollar hegemony anytime soon. But which country to break into BRICS if the gates were open and if there was a possibility to bring in a new currency? I would say, you know, probably UAE or Singapore, which are really good countries, and they have the rule of law, and they have very good monetary management. In fact, David, I would say that if I had the option, I would have appointed Lee Kuan Yew as the head of the United Nations 20, 30 years back, because he would have sorted out many of the international problems. But because of, um, uh, the poly— because of the way politics works, he would never have gone into international politics. But a small country like Singapore has created some outstanding statesmen and politicians, and I would certainly would have preferred a Singaporean leadership to, uh, to arbitrate some of the international conflicts. And I think Singapore would be a very good partner in BRICS. But then if you watch closely, Singapore navigates a relationship with China and the US extremely well. It has very good relationship with China and it has a very good relationship with the US, and both respect Singapore. So, uh, unfortunately, I don't think a reliable country would want to be a part of BRICS necessarily. I think a lot of people countries joining BRICS are the countries who are never invited to anything.

Well, speaking of Singapore, I was asked if I will consider teaching at the National University in Singapore. That's the one. But, but my desire is to move to China to teach in China. That's where, after what I saw when I was in Shanghai and I went to Guangzhou and Shenzhen and Hong Kong and Taiwan and Macau. And I mean, the country is far ahead. They just— I'm gonna be going back. Maybe I may meet you there, Giant. We can do live.

Well, yeah, I will, I will actually be for, for a decent amount of time. I don't know for sure, but I'll probably be in China for at least a month or two when I get there next week. I will of course be in Canada when I'll probably talk with you later this month. Okay, I, I will be in Canada for a couple of weeks, but I'll return back to China after that.

Yeah, I'll keep you, I'll keep you posted. And you and I, who knows, we might coordinate. It will be nice to see you there, and we can do a live from there. So, well, Giant, I can't thank you enough for really carving out time here for my community to learn more, to hear the truth, and also to expand and broaden the intellectual horizons for for everybody to learn here. This is, uh, once again, guys, it's not about pointing fingers at India, it's about pointing the facts. And Jayant talks about the facts. That's what matters. So, so we can't thank you enough, and I look forward to having you again here. So wishing you a good day, and, and I appreciate you, uh, Jayant.

Great, thanks for the opportunity, David.

My pleasure, my pleasure. So, well, guys, hope you enjoyed listening to Giant here. Uh, he's— you go— you guys heard him before here. He's, uh, uh, uh, he comes here, uh, regularly when he has time. I usually don't reach out to him every week because the man is busy. So, but, uh, he will be coming here on and off, and, and I, I kind of give it a time when he's available, and he always respond positively here because you want to hear, the updates. You want to hear the truth from Giants. So, and we look forward to having him again. So to all of you, I say thank you for being here. Uh, always remember, uh, if you want to support the channel for my upcoming Asia trip, uh, there is the link for you. I'm gonna show it for you guys where you can, uh, should you decide to, uh, donate for the trip, uh, will be going to Asia. China will be of course part of that trip, uh, down the road. So if you want to support the channel, I will be very grateful. I look forward to seeing you next time. I hope you guys enjoy it. And as always, remember, geopolitics impacts your daily life in more ways than one. Till next time, guys. Bye-bye.