More Gems from the Tucker Carlson - Vladimir Putin Interview

 

I ask again, is there any leader in the Western World who could have done such an interview as this?

Anneke de Laaf

T. Carlson:  Let me give you one example. The American dollar has united the whole world in many ways. Do you think the dollar will disappear as a reserve currency? How have sanctions changed the place of the dollar in the world?

V. Putin:  You know, this is one of the gravest strategic mistakes of the political leadership of the United States - using the dollar as an instrument of foreign policy struggle. The dollar is the basis of the power of the United States. I think everyone understands this very well: no matter how many dollars you print, they fly all over the world. Inflation in the USA is minimal: in my opinion, three percent, approximately 3.4, absolutely acceptable for the USA. And they print endlessly, of course. What does a debt of 33 trillion say? This is the same issue.

Nevertheless, this is the main weapon for maintaining US power in the world. Once the political leadership decided to use the dollar as a political tool, they attacked this American power. I don’t want to use any unliterary expressions, but this is stupidity and a huge mistake.

Look what's happening in the world. Even among US allies, dollar reserves are now dwindling. Everyone looks at what is happening and begins to look for ways to protect themselves. But if in relation to some countries the United States applies such restrictive measures as limiting payments, freezing assets, and so on, this is a huge alarm and a signal for the whole world. […]

By the way, payments in yuan were approximately three percent. Now we pay 34 percent in rubles and about the same, a little over 34 percent, in yuan.

Why did the United States do this? I can only attribute this to arrogance. They probably thought that everything would collapse, but nothing collapsed. Moreover, look, other countries, including oil-producing countries, are starting to talk and are already doing, paying for the sale of oil in yuan. 

Some believe that Libya's Khadaffi was about to switch currencies for Libyan oil when America and its allies decided it was time to take him out.

On BRICS

V. Putin: Look, God forbid, so as not to make a mistake, but in 1992, in my opinion, the share of the G7 countries in the world economy was 47 percent, and in 2022 it fell, in my opinion, to something like 30 percent. The share of the BRICS countries in 1992 was only 16 percent, but now it exceeds the level of the “seven”. And this is not connected with any events in Ukraine. The trends in the development of the world and the global economy are as I have just mentioned, and this is inevitable. This will continue to happen: as the sun rises, it is impossible to prevent it, you need to adapt to it.

How is the United States adapting? With the help of force: sanctions, pressure, bombing, the use of armed forces. This has to do with overconfidence. People in your political elite do not understand that the world is changing due to objective circumstances, and you need to make the right decisions competently, on time, in a timely manner in order to maintain your level, excuse me, even if someone wants a level of dominance. Such rude actions, including in relation to Russia, say, and other countries, lead to the opposite result. This is an obvious fact, it has already become obvious today.

=============================================================================================

Americans Losing Control of World Monetary System

UK support for China-backed Asia bank prompts US concern

The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank agreement was signed in October
by 21 countries, including China

The US has expressed concern over the UK's bid to become a founding member of a Chinese-backed development bank.

The UK is the first big Western economy to apply for membership of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB).

The US has raised questions over the bank's commitment to international standards on governance.
"There will be times when we take a different approach," a spokesperson for Prime Minister David Cameron said about the rare rebuke from the US.

The AIIB, which was created in October by 21 countries, led by China, will fund Asian energy, transport and infrastructure projects.

The UK insisted it would demand the bank adhere to strict banking and oversight procedures.
"We think that it's in the UK's national interest," said Mr Cameron's spokesperson.

'Not normal'
Pippa Malmgren, a former economic advisor to US President George W Bush, told the BBC that the public chastisement from the US indicates the move might have come as a surprise.

"It's not normal for the United States to be publicly scolding the British," she said, adding that the US's focus on domestic affairs at the moment could have led to the oversight.

Chinese construction site

However, Mr Cameron's spokesperson said UK Chancellor George Osborne did discuss the measure with his US counterpart before announcing the move.

In a statement announcing the UK's intention to join the bank, Mr Osborne said that joining the AIIB at the founding stage would create "an unrivaled opportunity for the UK and Asia to invest and grow together".

The hope is that investment in the bank will give British companies an opportunity to invest in the world's fastest growing markets.

But the US sees the Chinese effort as a ploy to dilute US control of the banking system, and has persuaded regional allies such as Australia, South Korea and Japan to stay out of the bank.

This is, indeed, another nail in the coffin of American control of the world monetary system. I fully expect the AIIB to use the Chinese Yuan as its base currency thereby further weakening the American dollar as the base of the world economy. Having a major western economy sign-on to that is of very great concern to Americans, as it should be.

In response to the move, US National Security Council spokesman Patrick Ventrell said: "We believe any new multilateral institution should incorporate the high standards of the World Bank and the regional development banks."

"Based on many discussions, we have concerns about whether the AIIB will meet these high standards, particularly related to governance, and environmental and social safeguards," he added.

Analysis: Linda Yueh, BBC chief business correspondent

It's a tricky task to align oneself with both China and the US. The Americans are apparently unhappy with the UK, while China has welcomed the British application.

It may be a pragmatic move, but it's hard not to offend one side or another.

I suspect this will be the first of many decisions to be taken by countries such as the UK to position themselves between the new economic superpower and the existing one.

The trick will be to come away with economic advantage at minimal political cost. We'll find out if this one will pay off for the UK.

'No consultation'
Some 21 nations came together last year to sign a memorandum for the bank's establishment, including Singapore, India and Thailand.

But in November last year, Australia's Prime Minister Tony Abbott offered lukewarm support to the AIIB and said its actions must be transparent.

US President Barack Obama, who met Mr Abbott on the sidelines of a Beijing summit last year, agreed the bank had to be transparent, accountable and truly multilateral.

"Those are the same rules by which the World Bank or IMF (International Monetary Fund) or Asian Development Bank or any other international institution needs to abide by," Mr Obama said at the time.

The Financial Times (FT) newspaper reported on Thursday that US officials had complained about the British move.

The report cited an unnamed senior US administration official as saying the British decision was taken after "virtually no consultation with the US".

"We are wary about a trend toward constant accommodation of China," the newspaper quoted the US official as saying.

However, in response to the UK announcement, World Bank president Jim Yong Kim told a news conference he supported the goals of the AIIB.

"From the perspective simply of the need for more infrastructure spending, there's no doubt that from our perspective, we welcome the entry of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank," he said.

Offence

The founding member countries of the AIIB have agreed the basic parameters that would determine the capital structure of the new bank would be relative gross domestic product.

Banking experts have estimated that, if taken at face value, this would give China a 67% shareholding in the new bank.

That's significantly different than the Asia Development Bank, which has a similar structure to the World Bank and has been in existence 1966. There, the majority stakes are controlled by Japan and the US.

Tony Abbott poses with Chinese President Xi Jinping at the
Apec summit banquet in Beijing - 10 November 2014

Speaking in Beijing last year, Mr Abbott said Australia would only sign up to "a genuinely multilateral body"

When asked if Britain would seek assurances before it signed on as a member that no one country would be able to unilaterally control the AIIB, economist David Kuo told the BBC that the UK "wouldn't have a great deal of say in the matter".

"He who pays the piper calls the tune," he said. "The UK could try and negotiate a power to veto projects but it is unlikely to get it," Mr Kuo, who is from investment advisers The Motley Fool, said.

The UK was caught between the US on the West and China in the East, he added.

"It hopes that it can exert force from within, rather than put pressure from the outside - but [the UK] is only one voice in a crowd of many."

With regard to the competition the AIIB would give the ADB or World Bank, Mr Kuo said there were plenty of infrastructure projects in Asia that needed funding.

"The existing sources of money can't do everything. So every little helps."