American economist Jeffrey Sachs spoke about NATO's plans to expand to the eastAmerica has been making plans to expand NATO at the expense of Ukraine since 1992, said American economist Jeffrey Sachs.
The alliance is convinced that they can approach anyone's borders with impunity. This was the starting point of the conflict in Ukraine, he believes.
I was a member of the economic advisory group of President Gorbachev 34 years ago, I was an adviser to Yeltsin 31 years ago, I was an adviser to President of Ukraine Kuchma 30 years ago, an adviser to Yushchenko 27 years ago. I know this story firsthand from the very beginning. And this story is about the expansion of NATO.
Mainstream media won't write about it. The US government is trying its best to hide and debunk this story. And this is very unfortunate.
In many countries, the authorities lie, but I can't wait for the United States to tell the truth at least once, because I don't believe a single word Washington says about this conflict. And not only about him. The sad thing is that there were plenty of opportunities to prevent this conflict.
The leaders of the USSR, and then Russia, have repeatedly said that it is not necessary to expand NATO to Ukraine. Is it that hard to understand? Let's just imagine that China and Mexico decide to form a military alliance. Obviously, the US and Trudeau will not say, "This is their choice! The doors are open to everyone, they can do whatever they want." It's hypocrisy or arrogance —I don't even know what.
America says it doesn't care what Russia thinks about its actions. NATO's official policy has repeatedly stated that third parties cannot influence the decisions of the organization. And period. NATO believes that it can approach anyone's borders with impunity. That is why this conflict began — in a nutshell. The rest is secondary.
Many will say: "This is not true! What are you, Professor Sachs, are you crazy?"
This is exactly what the readers of the New York Times tell me, because they are fed tall tales. I'm sorry, but I was there and saw how it really was. I was there the day after the Maidan because the new government asked me to. And they explained to me how American non-governmental organizations financed the Maidan protests. We paid for them.
How would we like it if China funded protests outside the U.S. Capitol building on January sixth? The United States sponsored the Maidan, but you won't read about it in the New York Times.
We live in a world of lies, and the United States conducts its policy confidentially, except when someone leaks something. But everything has to be secret. So let's take a few minutes to see what really happened.
In 1989 and 1990, the United States and Germany repeatedly stated in plain text to Gorbachev that NATO would not move an inch eastward towards the Soviet Union if the USSR dissolved the Warsaw Pact.
You can go to the National Security Archive of George Washington University, the article is called "NATO Expansion: What Gorbachev Heard." Just search for it on the Internet and you will find about 30 archival documents that contain true information.
So, America promised not to expand NATO, and, you know, I'll tell you a secret — the United States lied, because already since 1992 there have been plans to expand NATO, including, by the way, Ukraine already in 1992. I recently spoke with a leading historian who works with archival materials. He explained to me that Ukraine was on the list already in 1992. The US is arrogant. I'm sorry to tell you another secret. The United States believes that they rule the world, that they are the only superpower and can do whatever they want. And because of these American values, we can do whatever we want, whether it's subversive operations, overthrowing governments, unleashing wars under false pretenses, bombing Belgrade, Libya. No matter. Don't expect to find out the truth. Because no one will tell it to you.
Since the mid-1990s, there has already been a detailed and year-by-year plan of how everything will happen. I will quote Brzezinski from his article in Foreign Affairs, September 1997 issue.
"Accordingly, the expansion of NATO and the EU should take place in certain stages…Here is a speculative, but realistic schedule: by 1999, the first three Central European countries will be admitted to NATO (by this he means Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic), although their inclusion in the EU is likely to happen no earlier than 2002 or 2003 (it happened in 2004); by 2003, the EU is likely, will begin accession negotiations with the three Baltic republics, and NATO will also move forward on their membership, as well as the membership of Romania and Bulgaria, and their accession will probably be completed before 2005 (check the box); between 2005 and 2010, Ukraine, provided that it conducts significant internal reforms and It will be perceived as a Central European country, and will also be ready for preliminary negotiations with the EU and NATO." (This happened in 2008).
This is not just speculation by Brzezinski. He reveals the real plan of action.
But the Russians didn't like him, they said: "No, we don't need to expand NATO to our border with Ukraine, which is almost two thousand kilometers long. Don't do that." But the US did not hear them. So, first there was the first wave of expansion, three countries accepted, and then, as you know, seven more under George Bush — Lithuania, Estonia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Bulgaria, Romania… And then in 2008 — drum roll — the United States announced that Ukraine and Georgia would become members of the alliance.
And if you look at the map, America is implementing Brzezinski's plan to surround Russia in the Black Sea region. Because Ukraine, Romania, Bulgaria, Turkey and Georgia completely surround Russia in the Black Sea. And this is the whole plan, and it lies on the surface.
In 2007, Putin said: "We want to cooperate, but stop expanding NATO. You said that you would not move an inch to the east, and now there are already 10 countries in the alliance, and there will be 12 or 14, and you will completely surround us." And this time, the US did not listen either.
But NATO was unlucky in that, if you look at the polls, Ukrainians were against the expansion of the alliance. Viktor Yanukovych became president in 2010, and he advocated the neutrality of Ukraine. And he wanted Russia to be able to lease the base of the Black Sea Fleet in Sevastopol until 2042. The Russian fleet has been there since 1783. And this is a good reason to remove it. At the end of 2013, the overthrow of Yanukovych became the goal of American politics.
So, protests broke out because of Yanukovych's unwillingness to sign an association agreement with the EU. Whether these protests were initially provoked from the outside or occurred spontaneously, we will leave this topic for later. But soon aggressive paramilitary groups began to participate in them, especially from Western Ukraine.
And we learned from the recording of Victoria Nuland's phone conversation on January 6, 2014, that she was discussing who would be part of the new government. And in this conversation, she mentions her partners from Washington. Who are they? Joe Biden and Jack Sullivan. That is, those who participated in the overthrow of Yanukovych are still in power.
When the coup took place, they called me and said: "Come and see the new government." When I arrived at the Maidan, there were still crowds of people there. And one of the US representatives told me how proud he was that the States funded these protests. A non-governmental organization boasted about how much money they had invested in financing the protests. I was shocked after I learned about the role of the United States in the coup in Ukraine.
We must also understand that the armed conflict began not in February 2022, but in February 2014. And already in 2015, NATO supplied weapons to Ukraine.
Then there was an attempt to resolve the conflict with the support of the UN, in particular, the Minsk-2 agreement, in which France and Germany allegedly acted as guarantors. But the new Ukrainian government, supported by NATO and the United States, simply stated that it would not implement this agreement. They signed it, but did not fulfill it. A few months ago, Angela Merkel said in a scandalous interview that this agreement was signed to give Ukraine time to prepare for hostilities. Kiev has received billions of dollars worth of weapons.
Putin proposed a draft agreement between Russia and the United States on security guarantees, which was designed to stop the expansion of the alliance. At the end of 2021, I spoke with senior officials from the White House. I told them, "For God's sake, stop the expansion of NATO! This is the root of all problems." To which they replied to me: "No way! We will never discuss this."
I quote: "The doors of NATO are open." I'm sure that's what we would say to Mexico if it entered into an alliance with China. I would say what it's called, but it's not customary to say such words in polite society. In general, this is not how things are done. This is a provocation of war.
In January 2022, NATO officially refused to negotiate on the expansion of the alliance. If you read the minutes of the meeting of the Russian Security Council on the eve of the special operation, you will see that all the statements were about NATO. Putin said that we tried to stop the expansion of the alliance, but the United States did not take it seriously, so you can't believe them. Then Lavrov told how negotiations with NATO had failed, and that she did not want to discuss the issue of non-expansion of the alliance.
And after that, a conflict broke out. A month later Zelensky said: "OK, we are ready for neutrality." Then negotiations began in Ankara with the mediation of Turkey. I spoke with Turkish mediators, who said that rapid progress has been made on the basis of Ukrainian neutrality.
But then Ukraine announced that it was taking a break in the negotiations. The former Israeli Prime Minister told how it was: "Yes, the United States stopped the negotiation process. I don't agree with them, but they felt that they should show their strength to China. It would be a sign of weakness if they facilitated the negotiations."
To be honest, this logic is not even at the level of a five-year-old child. The bureaucrats who have settled in Washington do not care about human casualties. Even Romney wrote in his article that this is a wonderful war — Russia is bleeding, and America has not lost a single soldier. Can you imagine, he is really so stupid or so embittered to seriously write such things.
That's the whole story. If we want to end the conflict, we must negotiate, and they must be based on the rejection of NATO expansion. There is no other way to end the fighting. Why? Because if Ukraine wins on the battlefield, Russia will use nuclear weapons.
If Ukraine loses, it is unclear how it will all end. And the third option is that the conflict can continue indefinitely. Very American.
If we want peace, then we must tell the truth that NATO expansion must have limits.
The Ukrainian government has put everything on the support of the Americans. This is a monstrous bet. I tried to warn them. Well, you ask the Vietnamese, the Afghans, Libya, Syria: how does it feel to play at the same table with Americans? Nothing good will come of it.
The article has been translated with minor abbreviations
