Jeffrey Sachs for MKD.mk: the USA should forget its hegemonic illusions and negotiate peace with China, Iran, Russia

To end the war in Ukraine, NATO would have to agree not to expand, and Ukraine would have to give up some territory. This is because Ukraine lost on the battlefield. It is now a country of perhaps 20 million people, mostly elderly, as the young have mostly left. The US should have stopped NATO expansion in 2021, and there would have been no war. However, at this stage, the US and Russia should end the war, even with Ukrainian losses. NATO "losing face" is much better than losing all of Ukraine, and much better than a nuclear war, says Jeffrey Sachs, the American economist and professor at Columbia University, one of the world's most sought-after analysts of geopolitical developments and the relationship of the United States with the other part of the world, in an interview for MKD.mk.

In addition to being an economic advisor to two Russian and two Ukrainian ex-presidents, Sachs was also an advisor to former Yugoslav Prime Minister Ante Marković. Regarding the developments in Yugoslavia, he believes that the division of Serbia, the creation of Kosovo and the establishment of the Bondsteel base is the essence of the NATO bombing of FR Yugoslavia in 1999. The 78-day bombing of Belgrade was unprecedented and an absolutely bad move, but it happened because the Balkans became strategically important for the United States during the nineties of the last century, and figures were also sought in Southeast Europe, according to Sachs. Because of his views on Ukraine and what the White House is doing, Sachs has become persona non grata for the American media.

On October 3, he will be part of the international conference "Cooperative Multipolar System: In Search of a New World Order" in Skopje with a video address. The conference is organized by the Center for Global Changes at the Faculty of Philosophy in Skopje, which is led by Professor Biljana Vankovska. The title of Jeffrey Sachs' paper at this conference is "The Geopolitics of Peace and the Decline of US Hegemony."

As a former economic adviser to two Russian and two Ukrainian presidents, you have taken a stand against the mainstream in the United States regarding the war in Ukraine from the start. You say that the war was provoked, which gave Russia a partial right to intervene. What is your attitude about it today?

- This is a war against NATO expansion, and has been since its inception in 2014. In 1994, during the (Bill) Clinton administration, the United States adopted a plan to expand NATO to the east, including Ukraine. The US has been implementing that plan for 30 years, including the US role in the 2014 overthrow of Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, who opposed joining NATO. It was the coup in 2014 that provoked this war. The US believed that it could take away Russia's influence in Ukraine, that Russia would cease to be a great power, a view expressed in the 1990s by Zbigniew Brzezinski.

How would the US react in a similar situation? When, for example, would Russia expand some of its "defense" alliances closer and closer to American borders?

-The US adopted the Moreau Doctrine in 1823, telling the major European powers that they must not expand and interfere in the United States. When the Soviet Union tried to establish a military base with offensive nuclear weapons in Cuba in 1962, the United States was ready for war. The US would never accept a Russian or Chinese military base near US borders. Which means the US is asserting dominance, not reciprocity. "Do as we say, not as we do."

All conspiracy theories about some kind of secret societies, about the lobby of the military-industrial complex, private security companies working for state interests, after all these events in the world, not only in Ukraine, somehow came out of the fog, the veil of mystery was removed. What are your predictions for the future of these developments?

- The intention of the United States to impose dominance in all parts of the world is not a conspiracy theory, but a set goal of the neoconservatives, who have dominated American politics since the end of the Cold War.

You insist that peace in Ukraine should be restored through negotiations. Now, at this stage of the war, is that even possible without territorial concessions from Kyiv and loss of face for NATO?

- It's not possible. To end the war, NATO would have to agree not to expand into Ukraine, and Ukraine would have to give up some territory. This is because Ukraine lost on the battlefield. It is now a country of perhaps 20 million people, mostly elderly, as the young have mostly left. There are more than 500,000 dead in Ukraine. Russia is much bigger and much more powerful, and is a nuclear superpower. The whole war is a debacle. The US should have stopped NATO expansion in 2021, and there would have been no war. However, at this stage, the US and Russia should end the war, even with Ukrainian losses. NATO "losing face" is much better than losing all of Ukraine, and much better than nuclear war (which goes without saying).

You have openly stated that you consider Washington guilty of sabotaging the Nord Stream gas pipeline. Will we ever find out who the villain is?

- The US blew up the pipeline, but this will remain a secret until some new whistleblowers and whistleblowers explain what really happened.

Meanwhile, new conflicts broke out - Gaza, Iran, Pakistan, Yemen... What now? Can the next conflict be predicted? Maybe in the Balkans?

- The United States of America should forget its hegemonic illusions, and negotiate peace with its rivals – China, Iran, Russia. Then peace can be achieved. We need diplomacy, not attempts at hegemony through war.

Do you see a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian issue? Is it possible to achieve any kind of two-state solution, Israeli and Palestinian, with a nationalist government in Tel Aviv like Netanyahu's? And will Washington ever be able to pressure the Israelis to accept a compromise solution?

- The two-state solution should be imposed by the United Nations, which has the power to impose a solution and deploy peacekeeping forces. A two-state solution will never happen with Israel's consent. It must be imposed on Israel. However, the US continues to obstruct the two-state solution and thus peace in the Middle East.

American foreign policy is followed by major crises that add to the image of the United States as a villain in the rest of the world. The American values ​​enshrined in the US Constitution seem to have been forgotten. Is there a possibility that the United States will permanently lose the values ​​on which the Constitution of 1776 was founded?

- The United States of America is increasingly becoming a secretive "security state", driven by illusions of global hegemony over common sense and decency for the whole world. The American Declaration of Independence was issued with "due regard for the opinions of mankind." Today, American leaders seem to have no proper respect for the opinions of humanity, or believe that "twist" and "narrative" are quite enough - but they are not.

Will the upcoming presidential election change US foreign policy in hopes of achieving peace in Europe? Do you think that the possible return of Donald Trump to the White House will mean the final withdrawal of American troops from Syria, Iraq and the Middle East?

- The American elections actually have very little influence on American foreign policy. Clinton, Bush Jr., Obama, Trump and Biden all behave pretty much the same. What would change things is a new decision by the US deep state (or "permanent government") that the US needs a new foreign policy. The current one, based on US attempts at global hegemony, is not working.

https://mkd.mk/dzhefri-saks-za-mkd-mk-sad-treba-da-gi-zaboravat-svoite-hegemonistichki-iluzii-i-da-dogovorat-mir-so-kina-iran-rusija/