Sanjaya Baru Quotes

Alliances and partnerships produce stability when they reflect realities and interests.

In a world where global politics is no longer a zero-sum game, it is - or should be - counterintuitive to pursue one's interests without considering the interests of others.

Just as the United States doesn't like others to take charge, other countries also don't like the United States to play a dominant role in the United Nations.

Like other countries in the world, China must uphold its own sovereignty, territorial integrity and development interests. At the same time, we are willing to properly handle differences and disagreements in state-to-state relations.

Nations, like individuals in a state of nature, are equal and independent, possessing certain rights and owing certain duties to each other.

The world cannot be governed without juggling.

There are nearly 200 countries and a population of over 6 billion in today's world. International affairs should be addressed by all countries through consultations rather than monopolised by a few powers.

Our alliances should be understood as a means to expand our influence, not as a constraint on our power. The expansion of democracy and freedom in the world should be a shared interest and value with all nations.

Multi- polarisation has become an inevitable trend in the process of shaping a global political pattern and has been widely welcomed by the international community as it reflects the common interests and aspiration of the overwhelming majority of countries.

I believe that national sovereignties will shrink in the face of universal interdependence.

There will always be nations. The United States will last a long, long time, I believe. France and Germany and Japan, China, other nations, they're going to exist. But they're losing their significance and ability to deal with certain matters.

Here we encounter two conflicting concepts with which we must come to grips in our time: the idea of national solidarity and the idea of international cooperation.

Global conditions are far too complex to be able to imagine that they could ever be really controlled by one power.

I think that we had a different view of what the 21st century could be like, with much more of a sense, from our perspective, of trying to have an interdependent world: looking at solving regional conflicts, having strength in alliances, operating within some kind of a sense that we were part of the international community and not outside of it.

Americans tend to go for it all. In international politics you can’t have it all. You have to compromise.

In a shrinking world, the absence of order among nations is becoming less and less tolerable.

Multilateralism is the democracy of international society.

Multilateralism may be little more than a polite way of camouflaging what is in practice unilateralism with allies.

Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations,—entangling alliances with none.

A commonwealth then is so far independent, as it can plan and provide against oppression by another, and so far dependent on another commonwealth, as it fears that other's power

International negotiation has a nasty tendency to remind its practitioners that the laws of gravity affect them, too, and that international life is a two-way street in which one may have to give in order to get.

It is simply not feasible for sovereignty to be exercised unilaterally by individual nation-states, however powerful. It is a principle which will yield only slowly and reluctantly to the imperatives of global environmental cooperation.

While pursuing its own interests, a country should accommodate the legitimate interests of others.

This is not our choice but this is the law of the politics. You always reciprocate. Positively, negatively, but this is something which you cannot change. It was not invented by us. It is the law of international relations.

Gifts [concessions] to rising powers are rarely reciprocated. Mostly, they are just pocketed.