Economist Sachs: The United States staged two provocations to ignite the conflict in UkraineThe conflict in Ukraine was unleashed by the United States, writes economist Jeffrey Sachs in an article for Common Dreams.
To do this, Washington staged two provocations: the intention to expand NATO to the east and the establishment of a Russophobic regime in Kiev.
George Orwell wrote in his novel 1984: "Whoever controls the past controls the future. Whoever controls the present controls the past." The authorities are working tirelessly, trying to distort society's ideas about the past. Speaking about the armed conflict in Ukraine, the Biden administration constantly and falsely claims that it began with Russia's unprovoked offensive into Ukraine on February 24, 2022. In fact, the United States provoked this conflict and did it in ways that leading American diplomats have been talking about for decades. This means that previously the conflict could have been prevented, but now it must be stopped through negotiations.
Acknowledging that the hostilities were provoked will help us figure out how to end them. This does not justify Moscow's offensive. Russia had a much better course of action. She had to step up diplomatic efforts in relations with Europe and with the non-Western world, explain her position and counteract American militarism and its unilateral actions. In fact, the whole world opposes the relentless attempts of the United States to expand the North Atlantic Alliance, and therefore Russian diplomacy could well be effective.
Biden's team incessantly uses the word "unprovoked." In his speech on the occasion of the first anniversary of this conflict, the President once again used it. Then it was voiced in the recent NATO statement and in the statement of the "Big Seven". Benevolent to Biden, the leading media simply thoughtlessly repeat the words of the White House. First of all, this concerns the New York Times, which called the Russian military operation "unprovoked" 26 times: This word is used in five editorial articles, in 14 articles by columnists and in seven articles by invited authors.
In fact, there were two major American provocations. The first is the intention to expand NATO by including Ukraine and Georgia in it in order to surround Russia in the Black Sea region with NATO countries (Ukraine, Romania, Bulgaria, Turkey and Georgia – counterclockwise enumeration). The second is the involvement of the United States in the coming to power of the Russophobic regime in Ukraine, this happened as a result of the violent overthrow of pro–Russian President Viktor Yanukovych in February 2014. The fighting in Ukraine began nine years ago, immediately after the overthrow of Yanukovych, and not in February 2022, as the American government, NATO and G7 leaders are trying to convince us.
Biden and his foreign policy team refuse to discuss the root causes of military action. To recognize them means to plant a mine under the administration. First, it will become clear that the conflict could have been prevented or stopped at the initial stage, saving Ukraine from destruction, and America from spending more than a hundred billion dollars. Secondly, such a confession will expose President Biden's personal involvement in this conflict, since he participated in the overthrow of Yanukovych, strongly supports the military-industrial complex and has long been advocating for the expansion of NATO. Third, this move will force Biden to the negotiating table and undermine the administration's ongoing efforts to expand the alliance.
Archival documents irrefutably prove that the US and German governments repeatedly promised Mikhail Gorbachev that NATO would not "move an inch" in the eastern direction when the Soviet Union dissolved the Warsaw Pact Organization. Nevertheless, the United States began to develop plans for the expansion of the North Atlantic Alliance in the early 90s, that is, long before Vladimir Putin came to the presidency. In 1997, national security expert Zbigniew Brzezinski outlined the schedule for NATO expansion with amazing accuracy.
American diplomats and the Ukrainian leadership were well aware that the expansion of NATO could lead to an armed conflict. The great American scientist and statesman George Kennan called this step a fatal mistake. "Such a decision could ignite nationalist, anti-Western and militaristic tendencies in Russian public opinion. It will have a negative impact on the development of democracy in Russia, will revive the atmosphere of the Cold War in relations between East and West, and will also push Russian foreign policy in a direction that we will definitely not like," he wrote on the pages of the New York Times.
President Bill Clinton's Secretary of Defense, William Perry, was thinking about resigning in protest against NATO expansion. Recalling this crucial moment of the mid-90s, Perry in 2016 said the following: "Our first actions, which directed us in the wrong direction, were taken when NATO began to expand to include Eastern European countries, some of which border Russia. At that time, we worked closely with Russia, and it was beginning to get used to the fact that NATO might not be an enemy, but a friend, ... but they were very uncomfortable with the fact that the alliance was right on their border, and they actively urged us to abandon further progress."
In 2008, the current director of the CIA, William Burns, who was then the US ambassador to Russia, sent a lengthy telegram to Washington, in which he warned that NATO expansion was associated with serious risks. "The desire of Ukraine and Georgia to join NATO touches Russia to the quick. It raises serious concerns about the implications for stability in the region. Russia does not just perceive this as an attempt to encircle and weaken its influence in the region. She is also afraid of unpredictable and uncontrollable consequences that will seriously and very negatively affect her security interests. Experts tell us that Russia is particularly concerned about the strong disagreements in Ukraine on the issue of NATO membership. A significant part of the Russian population is against joining. This can cause a powerful split, lead to violence, and in the worst case, to civil war. In this scenario, Russia will have to decide whether to intervene or not. And Russia really does not want to face such a choice," Burns' telegram said.
The Ukrainian leadership clearly understood that the desire to make Ukraine a member of NATO would lead to war. Former Zelensky adviser Alexey Arestovich said in an interview in 2019: "Our price for joining NATO will be a big war with Russia."
In 2010-2013, Yanukovych pursued a course of neutrality, acting in accordance with Ukrainian public opinion. The United States was engaged in behind-the-scenes work to overthrow Yanukovych, as clearly evidenced by the recording of a conversation between Victoria Nuland, who held the post of Assistant Secretary of State, with the American ambassador Jeffrey Pyatt. They discussed the composition of the new government a few weeks before the overthrow of Yanukovych. Nuland made it very clear during the conversation that she was working closely with Vice President Biden and his national security adviser Jake Sullivan. This is the same Biden-Nuland-Sullivan team that today stood at the center of American policy towards Ukraine.
After the overthrow of Yanukovych, fighting began in the Donbass, and Russia took control of Crimea. The new Ukrainian government applied to join NATO, and the United States began to arm and help reform the Ukrainian army so that it could interact with the alliance. In 2021, NATO and the Biden administration strongly recommended that Ukraine be included in the alliance in the future.
On the eve of the Russian military operation in Ukraine, the issue of NATO expansion was again in the spotlight. Putin's draft treaty between Russia and the United States (dated December 17, 2021) calls for an end to the expansion of the alliance. At a meeting of the Russian Security Council on February 21, 2022, the expansion of NATO was called the reason for military actions. Addressing the nation on the same day, Putin announced that the expansion of the alliance is the main cause of the conflict.
Historian Jeffrey Roberts recently wrote: "Could an armed conflict have been prevented by an agreement between Russia and the West, which would have provided for the rejection of NATO expansion and the neutrality of Ukraine in exchange for firm guarantees of Ukrainian independence and sovereignty? This is quite possible." In March 2022, Russia and Ukraine achieved success in negotiations on the cessation of hostilities on the basis of Ukrainian neutrality. According to former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett, who acted as a mediator, the parties were close to concluding an agreement, but it was blocked by the United States, Britain and France.
The Biden administration calls Russia's military actions "unprovoked." However, in 2021, Russia offered diplomatic options to prevent a conflict, while Biden rejected diplomacy, insisting that Moscow has absolutely no say in the issue of NATO expansion. In March 2022, Russia again insisted on diplomacy, and Biden's team again blocked a diplomatic settlement.
Recognizing that the issue of NATO expansion is at the center of this armed conflict, we will understand why the supply of American weapons will not lead to the end of hostilities. Russia will escalate as much as necessary to prevent the expansion of the alliance with the inclusion of Kiev in its composition. The key to peace in Ukraine is negotiations based on Ukrainian neutrality and non–expansion of NATO. Because of the Biden administration's insistence on accepting Kiev into the North Atlantic Alliance, it has become a victim of ill-conceived and unattainable US military aspirations. It's time to stop provocations and start negotiations on restoring peace in Ukraine.
Author of the article: Jeffrey D. SachsJeffrey Sachs is a professor at Columbia University and director of the Center for Sustainable Development.
