Modi Seeks China’s Help as US Tariffs Crush India's Economy! W/Jayant Bhandari

Hello everybody and welcome to Geopolitical Trends, where truth matters. I know we are meeting a little early, right? Something different. Well, there is a reason for that, because I'm very excited to have my good friend, the giant, Bandari, joining us today. Yeah, I interrupted his vacation, so it was kind enough of him to agree, uh, to link in with us. So let me bring in giant right away. Hi, Jayant.

Hey, thanks very much for having me again, David.

Okay, well, on behalf of the entire community, we say thank you because we are interfering with your vacation, but we thank you so much for really carving out time for us here. To those who do not know who Jayant is, which means you have not been watching this channel, uh, Jayant is a friend of the channel. So Jayant Bhandari has been an Asia-based institutional investor advisor for the last few years. So, and prior to that, he worked for 6 years with US Global Investors in the US. Jayant also is a contributing editor of the Liberty Magazine, writing articles on political, economic, and cultural issues. So we are in for a treat, and thank you again, uh, Jayant. I want to get into it right away because we got a lot to cover here. Uh, there's a lot of conversation, a lot of media hypes coming out of New Delhi suggesting that Modi is already going to have one-on-one meeting with President Xi Jinping during the upcoming summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, which is going to be held in China August 31st through September 1st. To my knowledge, Beijing has not confirmed any one-on-one meeting. So what's this hype about? Is Modi looking for help from China?

Well, David, as you— if you can look around the relationship of India with other countries, you realize that India is friendless. India has no friends. India has only a couple of people it can bully, like Bhutan or some of the smaller countries that might benefit from it, like Guyana in South America. Now, those things do not benefit India in any way whatsoever, but India is a friendless country, and the reason is very simple. India is a valueless country. Indian politics is not driven by any set of virtues or values or any principles. It is driven by expediency. But moreover, remember that while Modi is traveling around the world, he's probably the most traveled head of state in the world today. But he does not travel to improve India's relationship with any country. He does it for internal demagoguery so that he can show to India how powerful he is in the world. But also, when he arrives in any country, he requires— he gets his embassies to send a whole bunch of women to dance in front of him, which is really abnormal in my view in today's times. But he comes, lands from— gets off the plane, and all these women dance in front of him, which gives a very good portrayal of him in the minds of Indians. So the Chinese visit is nothing but a continuation of that. Indians have started to recognize that there's something wrong. India is friendless. And now Modi wants to prove that that's not the case. China is sucking up to India. That's what he wants to portray to the Indian citizens.

Which I couldn't sort of— it's far from the truth. And this is what the media is saying in India. Because I've always argued, Jayant, and please correct me if I'm wrong, what value India has to offer China? For those who say, oh, is China trying to warm up the relations with India? No, I don't buy that argument. Am I wrong in this assessment?

Well, India has a lot to offer to China, actually, if India agrees to work with China. India can be the back office of China, for example. It can be the back office, back office manufacturing operations of China, because China needs low-cost labor. The cost of labor in China has gone up, is about 6-7 times that of India. So China will be more than happy to ship off some of its manufacturing to India the way it has done with Vietnam. Okay, also China would love to have access to the ports of India so that it could, uh, ship its stuff via the Indian ports. And also China would love to sort out the border problems with India. However, India wants to do none of these things because India does not want an economic growth. India does not want to give China access to its port. And India— Indian demagogues desperately do not want to sort out border problems with China, because if border problems with China go away, an external enemy which unifies Indians will go away. So unfortunately, none of these things will ever happen. And that is why Pakistan is a close friend of China. And I think if really, if there was a statement— there were a statesman running India, he would actually bring China closer to India and deal with Pakistan very nicely. If he saw Pakistan as an enemy— I don't want to see Pakistan as an enemy. I think all these countries should work together because Pakistan, India, and Bangladesh are horribly wretched countries.

Very interesting. I want to move into the economic— we're still going to be talking about the economic aspects of what Modi just did. And what he did was, is that he warns, he warns that US tariffs will sort of impact India's economy. Well, I am to say, isn't the Indian economy already a sluggish one? Which, by the way, I disagree with some intellectual right here in the West who are arguing that India is on the trajectory of improving its global standing economically speaking, which I don't buy that argument. What do you say?

Well, Indian economy has been slowing down, has been sluggish, and has been in a very bad shape for many, many years now. I have seen de-industrialization happen in that country. I've seen de-urbanization happen in that country. I've seen the desperation of people increase. I have seen more beggars on the streets in India than— as, as many beggars as I did in the '80s, or late '80s, actually. So India has taken a downward dive over the last few years. Indian economy has been very in a very bad shape. Now Modi needs someone to pass the blame to. And this is the traditional habit of India. If anything good happens with India, it is all because of India. If anything bad happens, they always find someone else to blame to— Pakistan, China, the US, or whatever. And that is why, again, no one likes to trust that, that valueless governance that India has. Now, look at the numbers. Numbers are— tell you a lot. The total exports of India is just about $450 billion. The exports that get affected because of American tariff relate to about $20 billion, and that is only in textiles and gems. And these are labor-intensive operations. So In terms of economic harm that tariff can deliver to India is minimal. What it does, however, is— and moreover, because textile and gems are often commodities, they can go via other countries, or they can— you can start exporting those to other countries, and some other countries can start exporting to the US. So I don't see a huge effect of this 5% export that India makes to the US, which comes under the tariff, as a major issue economically. However, this becomes a good way for Modi to pass on the blame to the US. But I think there's something deeper here. What Trump claims is that he wants India to open up agricultural sector of, of the country or to stop buying oil from Russia. None of these two things are going to happen because India benefits hugely from fertilizer and oil of Russia. So it can't really compromise with that. Moreover, if India opened its agricultural sector to the US, it will be devastating for a billion people of India, a billion people of India, who are in the agricultural sector. So, uh, this, this really something else happening. Trump knows that Modi cannot compromise on what Trump wants Modi to compromise. I think there's something else happening. During G7, when Modi flew to Canada, he was talking about stopping over in the US. He did not. In his recent visit of collecting, um, national awards of many small, uh, minor micronations He went all the way to Brazil for BRICS. He— there was a leeway there for him to visit the US. I think there was something happening in the back offices. And my guess is that Trump is very angry with Modi for something else. This is just a facade. The tariff issue is just a facade. There's something more fundamental behind it. Trump is extremely angry with Modi. If you listen to the statements he has recently made about Modi or what Modi says he has done, they did not talk for months at a time. So there's something else happening.

Yeah, well, that explains why Modi— well, there's a lot of, a lot of analysts in the West and so sort of arguing from that perspective that what India wants to do, it wants to play the China card because that's the, that's the only leverage it has. But on the other hand, there are those who are for and against the idea of China even considering helping India because they're saying you can't trust India. And with this, I'll ask you the question: should China, in your opinion, Giant, trust India?

Well, David, I really wish India were that smart to to be able to pay China or Russia or America card. Because, you know, in today's world, you have to have friends, and it's important to play some card, although it should be based on principles. But at least you should have— you should play some cards the way Pakistan is playing. Um, you, uh, so I wish India were that smart. Uh, no, uh, India is, uh, is not going to be respected by China. And China— Chinese have matured over a period of time. If you recall, a decade or two decades back, China was investing heavily in some of the Latin American countries and sub-Saharan African countries in natural resources, hoping that it would be able to use the Chinese web to benefit itself and maybe deliver benefits to the local sub-Saharan African economies as well. But China realized that the whip is usually not enough to ensure that the arrangement works. And as a result, China started moving its natural resources acquisitions to developed countries. So, so I think China has matured. China has realized that India will stab its back when time comes, because that's the nature of India's India's regime. So no, unfortunately, India is without friends today. And even Russia, which was the only superpower which was a friend of India, or at least in some vague way a friend of India, has started to engage with Pakistan. So India is truly without friends today.

Yeah, well, I agree with you in this because I really do see the challenges that lies ahead if China wants ahead and opened up, because you can't trust, in my opinion, and I'm again, I'm based this on my experience, not only during my days in Washington dealing with New Delhi from behind the scenes, we were always, always weren't sure about what they're saying once we leave the meeting. Things can change quickly, and I kind of don't want China to go into that direction because, you know, that is the nature of Indian bureaucrats and politicians.

You know, nothing happens without paying them a bribe. But once you pay the bribe, the next day they forget you. So you have to— even when I have to pay bribes to Indian officials, I have to do it very strategically, which means that I pay them, I agree with them that I would pay them 20% now, 20% tomorrow, 20% once the work is done. And, you know, strategize payment of bribes because these— they have no concept of honor. These are really spineless people running India today.

Well, this is again one of those concerns, and I appreciate you sharing this point because that's exactly how I see it also. And my reason for saying this also is because It was a recent meeting between Marcos Jr. and Modi. And Marcos, we all know, both now, both countries, India and Philippines, being pushed by the US regarding the South China Sea. How do you see this playing out? Is India trying once again to play some other cards that was not on the deck?

Well, India has— is a rudderless ship. There is no rudder. And look, you know, it's interesting, you're showing the image of Modi Look at his glassy eyes. There's no emotions in it. There's an emotional constipation in it. He has no vision of his own, so he just drifts to whichever side is expedient at any point of time. He will side with any country, for or against China at any point of time. He will side with US or go against it any point of time, not from strength, not from principles, not from values, but based on short-term expediency. And the reason is— and you know, David, you might not have read it— Modi is now on his way to Washington next month for UN General Assembly. And he will try to beg Trump to give him some time. Because India is in a deep crisis. Because despite the fact what I said about the tariff situation creating problems with the economy, the issue is that Because this is a labor-intensive sector that will face tariffs, there will be hundreds of thousands, maybe millions of people going unemployed because of that. And once this industry is destroyed, it will get destroyed. It will move to some other countries. It was already moving to other countries. So I think Modi is in a fix here. Modi is begging right now. So whenever you think about Modi going to China or the US or wherever, keep in mind that he is, he is going there with a begging bowl. And this is what happens with people who have no principles, no values, only short-term expediency.

Well, I couldn't agree more with you, Giant, using the term begging, because I use that term and I got criticized for it. And I'm saying, well, wait a minute, what will it be his reason for reaching out to China or some other country if they are willing? And this, by the way, Giant, leads me to one particular question I want to ask you. If the US offers India a carrot, do you think India will turn around and stab the Chinese or whomever they're dealing with in the back?

Yeah, they, you know, there's such a kind of a spinelessness that, you know, I just told you about how to bribe Indian bureaucrats. So you can offer them a carrot and they will still not do what you agreed to get them done. So they will still stab your own back. Forget about going and stabbing another country, they will stab your own back. So there's no reliability, there's no honor culture, there's no, no commitment to any principles. And that is why whatever India touches, whether it's Quad or BRICS, just somehow gets destroyed and hollowed out internally. Because India only plays its own short-term expediency card mostly, and actually only for the internal demagoguery within the country. Remember, David, that nothing internationally really affects India. And now this sounds crazy, but the problem is that Indian GDP per capita is just over $2,500 per Indian. Now, this means that only, you know, Every Indian on average has a bread in front of him. He does not really have access to resources. He has no food on the table. So what worse can happen to a person who really does not have much money? You can restrict electronic equipment supplies to India, you can restrict whatever, but nothing really affects India. Modi's job is one job, which is to go with a begging bowl to ensure that he looks good in front of Indian citizens. That's all he cares about. What happens to the economy, what happens to this international stature, is none of his business.

Oh, very interesting. You brought up the Quad, and we will talk about it in a minute here. I want to shift to one particular, uh, events that's taking place in the neighborhood, and I'm referring to Bangladesh here. And, uh, the reason I'm mentioning this because Bangladeshi court has now heard cases filed by the anti-corruption organization against former PM Sheikh Hasina. My question, Giant, we know where Sheikh Hasina is right now. She, she, she, she sought harbor in India because India was, was of course influencing them. Do you think India will honor the request by the court in Bangladesh to extradite her back for trial?

Absolutely not, because it goes against the image that India has created about Bangladesh, that it will cater to any of the demands of the current regime in Bangladesh. So no, irrespective of the legality of the issue or the fairness of the issue, India will not send Sheikh Hasina to Bangladesh ever. Wow.

Now, two other countries nearby that's been under the influence of China— of India, I'm sorry— for a long time, and I was aware of— we're talking about Nepal and we're talking about Bhutan. The third one is Sri Lanka, to a degree, but of course with the financial crisis that happened, which by the way, the West was blaming China for that. It turns out to be it was the IMF not China. It's the IMF loans that sunk Sri Lanka into financial crisis. Uh, Nepal, in my opinion, Giants, and please correct me if I'm wrong, I'm noticing Nepal has taken now the necessary step forward to free itself from the shackles of India's influence. Bhutan did not. Is there a reason for why Butan will not sort of seek an independence from, uh, from sort of, uh, decisions rather, uh, on its own, uh, from India.

Uh, well, it's very simple. If you have a girlfriend and you are very, um, and you, you fear that she might meet someone else if she goes out by herself and you shackle her and don't let her go out at all, uh, there is of course no way she can find another person to, to be with. This is the situation with Bhutan. India has shackled Bhutan so badly that Bhutan simply doesn't have any, any pathway to have a relationship with China. The shackles are so bad that Bhutan does not even have a diplomatic relationship with China. So Bhutan cannot communicate with China directly. It must communicate with China via India. Uh, which means that even if the regime in Bhutan wanted to get closer to China, it cannot because it just simply cannot start the process of conversation.

Yeah, but isn't Bhutan a sovereign state?

Yeah, but India is a very vindictive country. Uh, you know, you, you have to not— again, you have to go to the microcosm of that country, meet and deal and deal with the local bureaucrats and politicians. And you understand their character, they are very vindictive people. So if I pay a bribe to one person and don't pay a bribe to another person, or if I pay a bribe to a junior guy and the senior guy realizes that I overpaid the junior guy, they become very, very jealous, very vindictive. So, uh, the moment a sovereign country, uh, Bhutan, starts taking any step to get closer to China India will lash out, and India will lash out and show itself, itself as some great, great country. And it will harm Bhutan very badly because most of the trade of Bhutan happens with India. 80% of trade happens directly with India, and I think remaining 20% pretty much uses the Indian ports. So Bhutan is really stuck. Now, your question— implication of your question was, does India accept anyone as a sovereign country? Well, what India accepts is might makes right. So India had no problems taking over Hyderabad or Goa or even asserting its claim over Kashmir when India actually had rights on none of these. So when India can— when it comes to, uh, might is right, that is the guiding principle. So you— whether you are sovereign is a facade. They, they might accept it because they know that if they go and take over Bhutan tomorrow, US will come and start whipping India. So because of the fear of the US, they might not completely consume Bhutan, but they don't have a respect for you as a sovereign country if you're weak.

Yeah, well, I am aware of the Indian military training the Bhutanese. I mean, so for us, sort of, you wouldn't want to be trained by the Indian military. But which to me, it's problematic in a sense that, uh, uh, becomes clear that India has like this control over the security apparatus within Bhutan.

So they completely control Well, they completely control the security apparatus in Bhutan. The India-Bhutan border is so-called protected by the Indian Armed Forces. Now, really, if I were in that region, and I have been to the other side of, on the Chinese side of, on the other side, across the border from Bhutan, and I tell you, if I had, if I were sitting in Bhutan, and of course, I'm no, I have no understanding of what Bhutanese regime thinks. But I would want to have a closer relationship with China because across the border there is prosperity, there is calmness, tribal warfare in those areas have ended. So, you know, clearly I would want— I would see a jump in my GDP per capita by 200-300% over the next one decade if Bhutan or any other region in that part of the world becomes closer with China, even Myanmar.

To follow up on this, uh, uh, Giant, I had a good conversation with a good friend of mine in Singapore, and this issue came up. We talked about it, and I was very impressed with the idea that— which I couldn't agree more with his assertion— the idea that even if India is gonna get upset with Bhutan going with China, why not Bhutan considered some other ASEAN countries instead of China? Wouldn't that be a possibility, economically speaking?

Well, again, most of the international relationship of Bhutan is controlled very closely by India. As I said, India is a very jealous partner. India is a very vindictive partner. And India will not let Bhutan go away that easily. Um, that this is exactly what happened with Nepal. Nepal was very dependent on India, and India, when there was an earthquake in Bhutan and Nepal was— uh, sorry, Nepal— Nepal was crying and begging for oil and other resources. India wanted to play, uh, its might is— might makes right, uh, uh, assertions. He wanted Nepal to give in things that, that was none of the business of those days. So that is how India plays the game. It is an untrustworthy partner, and Nepal realized that. And despite the fact that it was until recently the only Hindu country on the planet, which is— Hinduism is also the majority religion in India— Nepal was by definition, uh, should have been close to India. Nepalese is no different from Hindi. I understand Nepalese almost completely. So there should have been a close relationship between India and Nepal. But because of this narrow-minded, petty, vindictive, jealous nature of the Indian regime, which emerges from the Indian society, means that Nepal decided that it wanted to go its own way to China. And now, eventually, Bhutan, my guess is, would want to do it. But it is— if you think through this thing, Bhutan is very, very badly stuck. Indian Armed Forces control it. Indian government controls its diplomatic relationships, and virtually all trade happens via India. So you can't really— Bhutan can't really say, hey, we will make a switch and sacrifice our prosperity for 2 months. Yeah, but what will happen if you starve to death in those 2 months?

Yeah, yeah, that's true. But at least for Nepal, I give them credit for really taking a bold step forward so they can free themselves from— maybe Bhutan needs to, you know, make the tough decisions that need to be made. And again, it depends on their king, whatever he decides on to move forward. I do see the possibilities. And the reason I'm saying this, uh, uh, giant, I had again this conversation with the, uh, my friend in, in Singapore, and I kind of see the possibilities because Bhutan can invite foreign direct investments. It doesn't have to depend on India. And again, why would you want to, you know, tie yourself to one country?

You, you— again, it's very hard for a person not living in India to understand the vindictive and corrupt nature of Indian bureaucrats and politicians. These are really sick-minded people, and if Bhutan or anyone takes a micro step in the wrong direction, they become extremely vindictive and they feel fully justified in doing any harm to the other person that they possibly can. So unfortunately, because might makes right runs in their minds, they will harm Bhutan so badly within the next few hours that Bhutan, if it wanted to go independent, would not even think about it.

Yeah, you mentioned, you mentioned giant, you mentioned the Goya, you mentioned Kashmir earlier. And I want just to really get your take on a question that I put for our community. And I have a very inquisitive community here. They really, really are tuned in exactly with what's going on around the world. And I asked them the question, should India— because we see the complications that's going on and so forth— would it be better if it is partitioned and each region can sort of self-governed? And the answer was— the answer, Giant, was 65% said yes. Are they wrong? Is the community wrong?

Uh, yeah, the, the answer is yes and no, uh, David Oualaalou. So the problem with that country is that, uh, let's say you divide that region into 300 parts, 300 different countries, which is the natural way that, that area should be divided. The problem is that they will get into a forever war. They cannot decide on borders between each other. They will try to play tricks on each other because that is the nature of the society. So my way of sorting out problem in that area would be to, uh, for the federal government to come, come decentralize as much as possible. And except for the border and water sharing issues and maybe a couple of other things, monetary management, a couple, a few things, federal government should completely remove itself from governance in that region. Because you, if you, if all these countries, if, if all these, if these countries split into smaller parts, they will have wars that will be never-ending. And that, that unfortunately, that is where it is going anyway. India is falling apart. India will fall into 200, 300 different countries, and these people will have tribal warfare that you have not seen in the recent past. Uh, so I, my, I think, uh, I would want to avoid that because it will be really ugly. Remember when Pakistan and India became two countries in 1947 and the English were still responsible for what was happening, a trainloads of dead people and raped women arrived on the other side. So millions of people died in that process. So if— imagine if splitting of that area into two countries created millions of deaths, what would happen if splitting that country into 300 parts would create? Yes, you know, another way would be to peacefully create a constitutional provision which allows each area to go off on its own. But unfortunately, Indians will never ever take that step the way it exists in, let's say, Canada or United Kingdom, that you can vote to secede. But that process does not exist in India. If you actually ask for secession, you would go into prison for the rest of your life under what I think is called National Security Act.

Wow, very interesting. Now this puts in perspective, uh, with what you stated earlier about the neighbor, the neighboring countries and so forth, why in my opinion India never wanted to resolve the border issue with China, because they know the Chinese will bring in infrastructure to the region, and I don't think so India wants to see that.

Yeah, and, and also, uh, you see, the Indian approach is that we will not give an inch of our land to anyone. Now, the problem is a lot of that border was a porous border. It was an undefined no-man's-land border. So, uh, India has to sit down and, uh, like, in a gentlemanly fashion let a demarcation happen. But also they were very stupid when Tibet— when India recognized Tibet as a separate— as a part of China, they, they could have at the same time required— would have required China to give in to the demands of India with relates— which related to border, because all border problem of India is with Tibet, not with, with the China of those days. If you look at the border of India, 100% of the Indian border from— yeah, I think 100% of the Indian border is with Tibet, not with what was China of those days. So India could have really sat down with China and said that, hey, we are going to recognize you, you, your Tibet as a part of China, which India did. But let's— you, why not you recognize the border based on our version? So India could have sorted that out. But these are really pure childish, infantile regime running that country. And that is irrespective of the political party, because Nehru was in power those days, which was Congress Party.

Wow, wow, very interesting, very interesting insights, Jayant. Thank you for sharing that. I want to move to talk two more topics here before I let you go. And I know we, as we said earlier, we interfered with your vacation here, but We're so grateful to have you share with us your analysis and your knowledge regarding this very, very sort of major developments that's going on. The next one I want to, or next question rather, I want to take or ask you has to do with India's role in Quad. It's becoming more vocal among some countries in the region especially they don't understand the role of India inside Quad while at the same time reaching out to China, which you and I know why Quad was established to begin with. What do you think, Jahan?

That's— yeah, this is, this is mind-boggling for a rational person to understand because you think, how can India be a part of SCO, which actually is a security arrangement with China, Pakistan, and other Central Asian countries, while you are also supposedly a part of Quad, which is actually against China, you know, at least that is what its purpose is, which is to have a platform against China. How can you be a part of two forums? But irrational, amoral people can do anything. They can be in this boat, they can be in that boat, and they can also be in the third boat at the same time. And India sort of claims to have friendship with the US, China, Russia, They, they are in bed with everyone but really in bed with no one. So yes, you are, you know, this, this is, this is all for internal demagoguery. SCO was, is really none of the business of India to join because it is a security arrangement with the, from what I understand, the Islamic fanaticism in Central Asia, which is a justifiable reason for China and Russia to have an involvement with. But India joined very likely because Pakistan was joining. Now, this SCO was supposedly a forum for security and anti-terrorism operation in that region, but India claims, and Pakistan similarly claims, that the other party is doing terrorist operation in the other country. So while they are blaming each other, how can they work together against terrorism in that region? So this is sheer stupidity, nothing else. Again, the fundamental issue is that India joins all these organizations to show off for internal purposes that it is the Vishwa Guru, it is the ruler, it is the teacher of the world, and it is, it is sorting out all the problems of the world when India is actually really unfortunately and it's shameful. It's a non-entity. No one cares about it despite the fact that it's the most populous country on the planet.

Well, you're absolutely correct, Jan. I'm, I'm really questioning what is India's role inside the SCO. I, I mean, just doesn't make any sense to me whatsoever. Even I'm even questioning its role in BRICS. I mean, to those who will say, well, it was a founding member, yeah, I understand that, but again, What value does India bring to the table? That's to me the, the bottom line of that. So I'll give you the last word, Jayant, before I let you go, uh, regarding this US tariffs on India, regarding India's maneuvering, uh, with now sort of pushing this kind of narrative as to, oh, we're gonna meet one-on-one with President Xi Jinping once again. I have no confirmation, at least from Beijing side, that there is a meeting that is already been set or scheduled. There's none. So where do you see all this is going and what do you think India is going to do next? I'll give you a last one.

India is a rudderless ship. It will just go wherever the wind and the waves take it. It has no direction. It has no vision. It has no policy, it has no values. So it is truly completely rudderless ship. And Modi is after winning the next election in the state of Bihar, which I think will happen 3 months from now. So his focus is there. He doesn't care what you and I think about him or what China and the US does, whether it's good or bad for India. None of those things matter to him. He does not even care if India loses part of its land to China or Pakistan. What he cares about is internal demagoguery so that he can win the next elections in Bihar. And once that election is over, he will start thinking about whatever election that happens next. So he is constantly in the canvassing mode. He wants to win election for the sake of winning those elections. He has no policies. You cannot predict the future of randomness. India is a random place. It's a rudderless ship. One thing I can predict for sure, that when you have no principle and no rudder, you are directionless and entropy kicks in. Entropy is the, is, is the ruler, and such a place will fall apart. So as we go forward, if we talk a year, 2 years, 5 years now, the situation of India will be far worse than it is today, and there might not even be an India a few years from now.

I really feel bad for Indian citizens, the people, the average people in India.

They deserve it, David. They cannot be helped. I, I spent— I went back to India after my post-graduation in the United Kingdom hoping to participate in, uh, in the development and growth of the country. I spent 10 years there, and I tell you, uh, nothing— you can, you cannot, uh, in— you cannot like up any passion or vision in any individual there. He's materialistic, he is ungrateful, he is— he has no vision for the future except to accumulate money for his own, for himself. That's what all his interest is. For such a people who has no values, no honor, no rudder, he will vote in ways that will create a rudderless political regime.

Wow, wow, wow. We can't thank you enough, Giant, for your insight. Uh, uh, for you, the community, I'm gonna put the link to Giant's, uh, uh, website there. You can check it out, check out his, uh, writings also on, uh, on, on LinkedIn. Uh, I do read up, uh, Giant, uh, uh, postings there. And, uh, also is on Twitter. You can follow him on that, and I put all the links into the description. So, so, Giant, I want to say on behalf of the entire community, I want to say thank you for carving out time for us and enjoy your vacation. And I look forward to seeing you again. Thank you, my friend.

Thank you very much for the opportunity, David.

Pleasure. Guys, I hope you all enjoyed listening to Giant. As always, uh, you know, someone I really, really If you want to learn about India and, and, and, and all the insights, uh, Jayant is one of that I turn to because I know straightforward. And as I said, we interrupted his vacation and he was gracious enough to agree with us to come on, on the show. Just FYI, remember, uh, on Friday I'm going to be doing an analysis regarding Iran. Something came up that I want to share with you. And also I am working out on having, uh, my two friends from Asia, uh, Anna Tengen and Warwick Pao from Australia. They're going to join us on the 18th here. Uh, Carl Zah will be— I didn't set the date yet— and Melissa Kemp will be here on the 19th. So I look forward to my conversation with her. So, well, I hope you guys enjoyed it, and I look forward to seeing you next time. As always, remember, geopolitics impact your daily life in more ways than one. Till next time, bye-bye.