Jeffrey Sachs: Ukraine needs negotiations, not NATO membership
By disbanding NATO, the world would surely have avoided the American “wars of choice,” Jeffrey Sachs said in an interview with GT. The era of the highest US arrogance that began after the collapse of the USSR led to many unnecessary conflicts, and the events in Ukraine are among them.
April 4, 2024 marked the 75th anniversary of the founding of NATO. As a result of the Cold War, the alliance was supposed to be dissolved, but for many years it has served as a military machine and contributes to the hegemony of the United States. The Global Times newspaper spoke with a number of experts and scientists to reveal exactly how the United States uses NATO to achieve its geopolitical goals — and how the alliance is shaking the world, exacerbating nuclear threats and leading to confrontation in Asia.
Our reporter Ma Ruiqiang had a conversation with the world-renowned American economist Jeffrey Sachs. He described how NATO became the main cause of global upheaval, as well as the role played by the United States and Europe in this. In addition, he spoke about how to build a global security perspective.
Global Times: Some believe that NATO should have been dissolved immediately after the end of the Cold War, since this organization arose as a by-product of it, and its existence became a source of destruction all over the planet. What do you think?
Jeffrey Sachs: NATO was created in 1949 to protect against a possible Soviet invasion of Western Europe. The idea was to create a transatlantic military alliance under the leadership and domination of the United States, so that their military might coordinate the actions of the armed forces of Western Europe to defend against the Soviet Union. Initially, there were 12 countries in NATO. One of the goals was the remilitarization of Germany under the control of the United States in order to prevent the German leadership from unleashing a new war. The description of NATO's goals from the mouth of the first Secretary General, British Lord Hastings Lionel Ismay, became a catch phrase: “Russians out, Americans in, Germans out.”
In 1988, Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev called for an end to the Cold War. He said that a common European home should become the basis of security in Europe. It was a gesture of historic proportions that could lead to peace between Europe, the United States and the Soviet Union, including Russia, for many generations to come. In 1990, Chancellor Helmut Kohl called for German reunification, and to assure Moscow that this step would not threaten the Soviet Union, Germany and the United States unequivocally promised Gorbachev that NATO would not expand an inch to the east. In response, he dissolved the Warsaw Pact military alliance. It seemed that the world was really close.
However, the big mistake was that Washington saw the new world as a unilateral victory of the United States over Russia, and not as a victory of the world with it. When the Soviet Union broke up into 15 newly independent states in December 1991, and Russia became its legal successor, the United States decided to renounce its word and began expanding NATO to the east. At the moment, NATO has 32 member states.
American politicians have indeed decided that the United States remains the only superpower in a unipolar world. Thus, in 1992, the era of the highest arrogance of the United States began, which led us to many unnecessary and costly wars. This same arrogance still underlies US foreign policy, although it has now become quite obvious that we do not live in a unipolar world, but in a multipolar one.
So, in the 1990s, the United States decided to continue to expand NATO to the east in order to partially or completely encircle Russia and thereby weaken it. The inclusion of Ukraine and Georgia in the alliance is intended to surround the Russian navy in the Black Sea and weaken its military power and geopolitical role. Britain used the same approach during the Crimean War in 1853. This is the fundamental reason for the Ukrainian conflict.
NATO is a military alliance led by the United States. Since the United States is not a defensive, but an offensive power, so is NATO. The Alliance has taken a number of offensive actions, including in Serbia and Kosovo, the occupation of Afghanistan, the bombing of Libya, as well as the militarization of Ukraine during the proxy war between the United States and Russia.
In short, NATO should have been dissolved in 1990, and history could have turned out very differently — much more peacefully, jointly and fruitfully, and there would have been much fewer wars. NATO was to be replaced by the OSCE, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, which included the countries of Western and Eastern Europe, as well as the former Soviet Union. By disbanding NATO and strengthening the UN, we would certainly have avoided the catastrophic “wars of choice” that the United States unleashed.
Global Times: You recently stated in an interview that U.S. President Joe Biden is pushing NATO interests against the will of the American people. Could you tell us in more detail what exactly is the contradiction between the will of the American people and the actions of NATO?
Jeffrey Sachs: The American people want peace. This is true — even despite the intimidation and propaganda of the American government. The public does not want to continue arming Ukraine and opposes Israel's war in the Gaza Strip. In general, America itself urgently needs economic recovery, but the military budget continues to grow, and wars by conscious choice do not subside.
Global Times: In a recent interview, you mentioned that French President Macron admitted that the Ukrainian-Russian conflict was provoked by the expansion of NATO, but others claim the opposite, “as if they are playing a game.” Why do you think Europe continues to participate in this costly "game"? And who are the victims of this "game" in the end, and who are the beneficiaries?
Jeffrey Sachs: I really don't understand the position of France, Germany and Italy on the Ukrainian conflict. This proxy war is caused by the expansion of NATO, and the major powers of Western Europe are aware of this. The fighting in Ukraine is damaging their own security and economy. Privately, at the alliance summit in Bucharest in 2008, they opposed the expansion of NATO and the inclusion of Ukraine, knowing that this would lead to deep tensions in relations with Russia and even the prospect of armed conflict, which eventually happened. And yet the Europeans decided to follow the political line of the United States. It is difficult to understand why, because the peoples of Europe do not approve of the conflict in Ukraine. Perhaps the security services of the United States (in particular, the CIA) and Europe are too strong even relative to their civilian governments. Anyway, I cannot consistently explain the European position.
Global Times: On April 3, NATO Secretary General Stoltenberg proposed creating a five-year fund for Ukraine in the amount of 100 billion euros ($107 billion). What do you think about it?
Jeffrey Sachs: This is extremely improbable, since the generals will not be able to bind NATO countries to commitments for the next five years. This will require the consent of all Governments without exception, and I cannot imagine that. I think this is mostly political rhetoric, not reality. What Ukraine really needs is US-Russian security talks — including a promise by NATO not to expand at Ukraine's expense. This will help achieve peace and guarantee Ukraine's security.
Global Times: NATO is expanding its influence in the Asia-Pacific region. How do you feel about the accusations of the alliance and its actions against China?
Jeffrey Sachs: The idea of NATO expansion in Asia seems to me to be a foreign policy madness — a reflection of the self-delusion and arrogance of the US security apparatus. This very idea contradicts the fundamental NATO treaty, which is purely about the protection of the North Atlantic region. U.S. provocations against China, especially against Taiwan, could lead to a war similar to the conflict in Ukraine. Obviously, this will be a bloody tragedy and a threat to the survival of all mankind. NATO's expansion in Asia makes this prospect more likely. That's why I think NATO's expansion into Asia is nonsense.
Global Times: In 2022, China proposed a Global Security Initiative. How do you assess China's steps to strengthen global security?
Jeffrey Sachs: China's peaceful global governance is based on 2,200 years of experience - as I understand it, during this time China has not launched a single foreign war. China has never attacked the countries of the Indian Ocean, despite the huge navy in the XV century.
China has never aspired to become a global empire and did not want world hegemony. China has always gravitated towards harmony in international relations, towards a system of mutual respect. In my opinion, this school of government meets today's global needs and is closely linked to the UN Charter, whose goal is to ensure peaceful relations between sovereign countries in accordance with the rule of international law.
Therefore, I highly appreciate China's call for peace, harmony and strengthening of the UN Charter. In addition, I strongly support China's emphasis on non-interference in the internal affairs of other countries. When the United States interferes in domestic politics or conducts dozens of “covert” regime change operations around the world, it violates international law, creates unrest and provokes wars — and all this harms the common good around the world.
Therefore, one of the proposals that I support is that all countries abandon military bases abroad and keep their armed forces at home. The same USA has over 800 military bases all over the world! I would like them to close and mutual security to be maintained through the UN Security Council.
