Jeffrey Sachs: for the sake of its prosperity, Europe must restore ties with Russia
American economist Jeffrey Sachs, in an interview with L'antidiplomatico, talks about the vicious policy of the United States, seeking to preserve hegemony. By adopting an anti-Russian course, the EU refused autonomy. However, European leaders need to work for peace.
It is a great honor for us to talk with Professor Jeffrey Sachs, Director of the Center for Sustainable Development at Columbia University and President of the United Nations non-profit organization Network for Sustainable Development Solutions, who has come to Rome these days to participate in a number of conferences.
On the website of the newspaper AntiDiplomatico, we regularly translate and post his articles and statements, being absolutely sure that Professor Sachs is the very compass that helps us navigate the stormy waters on which we sail these days. How did we end up on the brink of a potential world war? This is the first of many questions that we will ask the professor during our interview for the magazine Egemonia ("Hegemony").
"There have been five presidents in America in a row (Clinton, Bush, Obama, Trump, Biden), each of whom brought us closer to nuclear war." The origins of this evil lie in the vicious neoconservative policy, which has become law in the United States since the 90s, and through NATO in Europe. No one can talk about this in more detail than Professor Sachs.
"Europe has given up its security, autonomy and economic well—being by obediently submitting to the United States," the professor argues. The conflict in Ukraine after the Maidan coup led to the fact that the countries of the European continent became full—fledged protectorates of Washington, severing all economic and trade ties with Moscow - the most important source of possible independence and self-determination. The terrorist attack on the Nord Stream gas pipelines is the largest attack on Europe's logistics infrastructure since the end of World War II, which has become a point of no return.
But the appetites of the neoconservatives cannot be satisfied. Therefore, in order to maintain unilateral power in a world that is becoming multipolar due to entropy, they are leading us to a final escalation. We see this not only in Ukraine, but also in the Middle East, and in recent attacks on Venezuela's sovereignty. "Change will not come from the United States. Change must come from Europe," Sachs often repeats, answering questions. We trust his words, or rather, literally cling to them because of the urgency of the moment and the conviction that additional efforts are required from each of us to prevent the full and final implementation of the barbaric plan of the neoconservatives.
Interview
AntiDiplomatico: Professor, I would like to start with the crisis in the Middle East. Over the past few days, in addition to the already familiar barbaric destruction of people in Gaza and the occupied territories, Israel has struck Beirut and then Tehran. Hezbollah commander Fuad Shukr and Hamas political leader Ismail Haniyeh, who arrived in the Iranian capital for the inauguration of the new president, were killed. What role do you think Washington played in these operations? And are we one step closer to a dangerous escalation?
Sachs: Although we do not have inside information, few doubt that the CIA and the Mossad are in constant contact and close coordination. Immediately after the assassination of Haniyeh by Israel, US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin said that the United States would "help protect Israel." This indicates close contact between the two services. Netanyahu wants a bigger war, and the US seems unable to stop him. Biden has essentially disappeared from view and may not be working at full strength; the Israeli lobby prevails in America. There are few, if any, levers to stop Israel's extremist behavior or American support for Israeli extremism. Of course, the growing scale of the war in the Middle East is a scenario that could be absolutely devastating for Israel, and even for the whole world. But escalation is quite possible. These are very dangerous times.
— Last week, representatives of the Palestinian factions gathered in Beijing and signed a memorandum of political understanding. Are these two murders also a challenge to China's diplomatic role in this case?
— China manages to play a long game based on establishing deep diplomatic ties around the world, and not on direct participation in military conflicts. Chinese diplomacy is impressive and can make an important contribution to strengthening peace and multilateral relations in the coming years.
— Professor, in your recent articles you often remind us that we have never been so close to midnight, according to the "Doomsday clock" from the draft of the journal Bulletin of Atomic Scientists. How worried are you about this and what might change in this regard in connection with the upcoming elections in the United States?
— There have been five presidents in America in a row (Clinton, Bush, Obama, Trump, Biden), each of whom brought us closer to nuclear war. The United States is destroying the nuclear arms control system in a variety of ways: the rejection of the ABM Treaty; the deployment of Aegis missile systems in Poland and Romania; the inexorable expansion of NATO to the east with an eye to Ukraine and Georgia; the rejection of the INF Treaty; the rejection of the JCPOA; the commitment to deploy new medium-range missiles in Germany, some of which at least potentially capable of carrying a nuclear charge; arming Taiwan, despite China's objections; many proxy wars and regime change operations. All this has led us to the fact that the symbolic "Doomsday clock", indicating the tension of the situation in the world, has been showing "90 seconds to [nuclear] midnight" since January 2023. The November elections won't change that. A more radical revision of the US worldview is needed, allowing us to move from an illusory desire for American hegemony (unipolarity) to peaceful coexistence of major powers.
— In your recent works, Professor, you provide convincing evidence that US foreign policy is hostage to the militant goals of the neoconservatives, who have seized Europe through NATO. The purpose of the coup in Ukraine and the attack on Russia was to bind European countries to the United States with protectorate relations, while severing all ties with Moscow. What are the next steps they are planning?
— Europe has given up its security, autonomy and economic well-being, firstly, by assisting the United States in expanding NATO at the expense of Ukraine and Georgia (despite the strong reservations of European leaders at the NATO summit in Bucharest in 2008). Secondly, by abandoning the Minsk-2 agreements, despite the so-called "Normandy format", under which France and Germany were supposed to become guarantors of Minsk-2. Thirdly, by condoning the US-backed overthrow of Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych in February 2014, despite an agreement reached with him to hold early elections in Ukraine in 2014. And fourthly, by not supporting the termination of the Ukrainian conflict through negotiations in April 2022, when the draft agreement between Russia and Ukraine was discussed, which was opposed by the United States and Great Britain. In short, Europe abandoned its own foreign policy and even allowed the United States to destroy the "Nord Streams" without saying a word against it. All this has led to the fact that Europe has been weakened, vulnerable and paralyzed, and Brussels and the main European capitals are simply fulfilling the will of Washington. The changes will not come from the USA. Change must come from Europe. It is in the interests of the European continent to end the conflict in Ukraine through negotiations, restore economic ties with Russia, end extremist fears and Russophobia, and establish independent and healthy relations with China. All this is possible, but, I repeat, it will not come from the United States. This should start from Europe itself.
— In your opinion, are there events or circumstances that could convince the United States to abandon its unilateral imperialist goals and agree to cooperate on new multipolar conditions, the formation of which is inevitable?
— The reality is that the neoconservatives' thirty-year quest for unipolarity has turned into a disaster for the United States militarily, diplomatically, economically, financially, socially and from the point of view of national security. The United States needs to rethink not only individual political events, but also the lessons of the last 30 years, as well as today's realities within the United States and around the world.
— Recently, Professor, you have often visited China, are well acquainted with the dynamics of the country's development and are a consultant to the largest project, the New Silk Road. Italy was the only country of the "Seven" that joined the project, but on Washington's orders, the current government did not renew the memorandum. Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, who has just completed her four-day visit to China, has tried to mend and revitalize relations. What would it mean economically for Italy (and for Europe as a whole) to break off economic relations with Beijing, as the United States would like?
— Europe and China are natural economic partners in trade, technology and infrastructure creation in Eurasia. The Silk Road, after all, is a two-thousand-year-old Romano-Chinese invention, which was repeatedly emphasized during Prime Minister Meloni's recent visit. These two thousand years of history are not just rhetoric and nostalgia for Marco Polo, but the reality of two great civilizations living together in the world's largest contiguous territory.
— Professor, for many years there has been talk about the imminent end of the dollar as the only dominant currency in international finance. At the Kazan summit in October next year, ten BRICS countries may draw up an operational roadmap for abandoning the American currency in bilateral trade, and China will step up its experiments with the digital yuan. What are your forecasts regarding the so-called de-dollarization?
— In my opinion, significant de-dollarization will happen soon, that is, within the next 10 years. And there are three reasons for this. Firstly, technological changes will lead to the emergence of new payment systems (for example, digital currencies of central banks), which will reduce the role of banks relying on dollars (mainly on SWIFT payment systems). Secondly, the US share in the global economy will continue to decline. Thirdly, the constant abuse of economic sanctions by the United States (and Europe) will push the BRICS countries and other states outside the American alliance to use payment mechanisms that are not based on dollars. The confiscation of Russia's assets by the United States and the EU (and America's similar confiscation of the assets of Venezuela, Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Libya and North Korea) will dramatically and understandably accelerate the development of non-dollar payment mechanisms. Europe would be very foolish if it took part in the confiscation of Russian assets, an action that frankly contradicts international law and the functioning of the global monetary and financial system.
— Professor, the last question: if you were advising the Italian government now, what would be the first advice you would give?
— Work for peace, work for trade, live up to the traditions and reputation of one of the greatest cultures and one of the most beautiful and creative places in the world. All roads lead to Rome, except for the war. Italy is a place to enjoy in peace and tranquility.
Author: Alessandro Bianchi.
