#Jeffrey Sachs

[theculturedmarxist]

How the Neocons Subverted Russia’s Financial Stabilization in the Early 1990s

by Jeffrey Sachs

In 1989 I served as an advisor to the first post-communist government of Poland, and helped to devise a strategy of financial stabilization and economic transformation.  My recommendations in 1989 called for large-scale Western financial support for Poland’s economy in order to prevent a runaway inflation, enable a convertible Polish currency at a stable exchange rate, and an opening of trade and investment with the countries of the European Community (now the European Union).  These recommendations were heeded by the US Government, the G7, and the International Monetary Fund.  

Based on my advice, a $1 billion Zloty stabilization fund was established that served as the backing of Poland’s newly convertible currency.  Poland was granted a standstill on debt servicing on the Soviet-era debt, and then a partial cancellation of that debt.  Poland was granted significant development assistance in the form of grants and loans by the official international community.  

Poland’s subsequent economic and social performance speaks for itself.  Despite Poland’s economy having experienced a decade of collapse in the 1980s, Poland began a period of rapid economic growth in the early 1990s.  The currency remained stable and inflation low.  In 1990, Poland’s GDP per capita (measured in purchasing-power terms) was 33% of neighboring Germany.  By 2024, it had reached 68% of Germany’s GDP per capita, following decades of rapid economic growth. 

On the basis of Poland’s economic success, I was contacted in 1990 by Mr. Grigory Yavlinsky, economic advisor to President Mikhail Gorbachev, to offer similar advice to the Soviet Union, and in particular to help mobilize financial support for the economic stabilization and transformation of the Soviet Union. One outcome of that work was a 1991 project undertaken at the Harvard Kennedy School with Professors Graham Allison, Stanley Fisher, and Robert Blackwill. We jointly proposed a “Grand Bargain” to the US, G7, and Soviet Union, in which we advocated large-scale financial support by the US and G7 countries for Gorbachev’s ongoing economic and political reforms. The report was published as Window of Opportunity: The Grand Bargain for Democracy in the Soviet Union (1 October 1991).

The proposal for large-scale Western support for the Soviet Union was flatly rejected by the Cold Warriors in the White House.  Gorbachev came to the G7 Summit in London in July 1991 asking for financial assistance, but left empty-handed.  Upon his return to Moscow, he was abducted in the coup attempt of August 1991.  At that point, Boris Yeltsin, President of the Russian Federation, assumed effective leadership of the crisis-ridden Soviet Union.  By December, under the weight of decisions by Russia and other Soviet republics, the Soviet Union was dissolved with the emergence of 15 newly independent nations.  

In September 1991, I was contacted by Yegor Gaidar, economic advisor to Yeltsin, and soon to be acting Prime Minister of newly independent Russian Federation as of December 1991. He requested that I come to Moscow to discuss the economic crisis and ways to stabilize the Russian economy. At that stage, Russia was on the verge of hyperinflation, financial default to the West, the collapse of international trade with the other republics and with the former socialist countries of Eastern Europe, and intense shortages of food in Russian cities resulting from the collapse of food deliveries from the farmlands and the pervasive black marketing of foodstuffs and other essential commodities.  

I recommended that Russia reiterate the call for large-scale Western financial assistance, including an immediate standstill on debt servicing, longer-term debt relief, a currency stabilization fund for the ruble (as for the Zloty in Poland), large-scale grants of dollars and European currencies to support urgently needed food and medical imports and other essential commodity flows, and immediate financing by the IMF, World Bank, and other institutions to protect Russia’s social services (healthcare, education, and others).

In November 1991, Gaidar met with the G7 Deputies (the deputy finance ministers of the G7 countries) and requested a standstill on debt servicing.  This request was flatly denied.  To the contrary, Gaidar was told that unless Russia continued to service every last dollar as it came due, emergency food aid on the high seas heading to Russia would be immediately turned around and sent back to the home ports.  I met with an ashen-faced Gaidar immediately after the G7 Deputies meeting.  

In December 1991, I met with Yeltsin in the Kremlin to brief him on Russia’s financial crisis and on my continued hope and advocacy for emergency Western assistance, especially as Russia was now emerging as an independent, democratic nation after the end of the Soviet Union.  He requested that I serve as an advisor to his economic team, with a focus on attempting to mobilize the needed large-scale financial support.  I accepted that challenge and the advisory position on a strictly unpaid basis.    

Upon returning from Moscow, I went to Washington to reiterate my call for a debt standstill, a currency stabilization fund, and emergency financial support.  In my meeting with Mr. Richard Erb, Deputy Managing Director of the IMF in charge of overall relations with Russia, I learned that the US did not support this kind of financial package.  I once again pleaded the economic and financial case, and was determined to change US policy.  It had been my experience in other advisory contexts that it might require several months to sway Washington on its policy approach.  

Indeed, during 1991-94 I would advocate non-stop but without success for large-scale Western support for Russia’s crisis-ridden economy, and support for the other 14 newly independent states of the former Soviet Union. I made these appeals in countless speeches, meetings, conferences, op-eds, and academic articles. Mine was a lonely voice in the US in calling for such support.  I had learned from economic history — most importantly the crucial writings of John Maynard Keynes (especially Economic Consequences of the Peace, 1919) — and from my own advisory experiences in Latin America and Eastern Europe, that external financial support for Russia could well be the make or break of Russia’s urgently needed stabilization effort.  

It is worth quoting at length here from my article in the Washington Post in November 1991 to present the gist of my argument at the time:  

This is the third time in this century in which the West must address the vanquished. When the German and Hapsburg Empires collapsed after World War I, the result was financial chaos and social dislocation. Keynes predicted in 1919 that this utter collapse in Germany and Austria, combined with a lack of vision from the victors, would conspire to produce a furious backlash towards military dictatorship in Central Europe. Even as brilliant a finance minister as Joseph Schumpeter in Austria could not stanch the torrent towards hyperinflation and hyper-nationalism, and the United States descended into the isolationism of the 1920s under the "leadership" of Warren G. Harding and Sen. Henry Cabot Lodge. After World War II, the victors were smarter. Harry Truman called for U.S. financial support to Germany and Japan, as well as the rest of Western Europe. The sums involved in the Marshall Plan, equal to a few percent of the recipient countries' GNPs, was not enough to actually rebuild Europe. It was, though, a political lifeline to the visionary builders of democratic capitalism in postwar Europe. Now the Cold War and the collapse of communism have left Russia as prostrate, frightened and unstable as was Germany after World War I and World War II. Inside Russia, Western aid would have the galvanizing psychological and political effect that the Marshall Plan had for Western Europe. Russia's psyche has been tormented by 1,000 years of brutal invasions, stretching from Genghis Khan to Napoleon and Hitler. Churchill judged that the Marshall Plan was history's "most unsordid act," and his view was shared by millions of Europeans for whom the aid was the first glimpse of hope in a collapsed world. In a collapsed Soviet Union, we have a remarkable opportunity to raise the hopes of the Russian people through an act of international understanding. The West can now inspire the Russian people with another unsordid act.

This advice went unheeded, but that did not deter me from continuing my advocacy.  In early 1992, I was invited to make the case on the PBS news show The McNeil-Lehrer Report.  I was on air with acting Secretary of State Lawrence Eagleburger.  After the show, he asked me to ride with him from the PBS studio in Arlington, Virginia back to Washington, D.C.  Our conversation was the following.  “Jeffrey, please let me explain to you that your request for large-scale aid is not going to happen.  Even assuming that I agree with your arguments — and Poland’s finance minister [Leszek Balcerowicz] made the same points to me just last week — it’s not going to happen.  Do you want to know why?  Do you know what this year is?”  “1992,” I answered.  “Do you know that this means?”  “An election year?” I replied.  “Yes, this is an election year.  It’s not going to happen.”

Russia’s economic crisis worsened rapidly in 1992.  Gaidar lifted price controls at the start of 1992, not as some purported miracle cure but because the Soviet-era official fixed prices were irrelevant under the pressures of the black markets, the repressed inflation (that is, rapid inflation in the black-market prices and therefore the rising the gap with the official prices), the complete breakdown of the Soviet-era planning mechanism, and the massive corruption engendered by the few goods still being exchanged at the official prices far below the black-market prices.  

Russia urgently needed a stabilization plan of the kind that Poland had undertaken, but such a plan was out of reach financially (because of the lack of external support) and politically (because the lack of external support also meant the lack of any internal consensus on what to do).  The crisis was compounded by the collapse of trade among the newly independent post-Soviet nations and the collapse of trade between the former Soviet Union and its former satellite nations in Central and Eastern Europe, which were now receiving Western aid and were reorienting trade towards Western Europe and away from the former Soviet Union.  

During 1992 I continued without any success to try to mobilize the large-scale Western financing that I believed to be ever-more urgent.  I pinned my hopes on the newly elected Presidency of Bill Clinton. These hopes too were quickly dashed. Clinton’s key advisor on Russia, Johns Hopkins Professor Michael Mandelbaum, told me privately in November 1992 that the incoming Clinton team had rejected the concept of large-scale assistance for Russia. Mandelbaum soon announced publicly that he would not serve in the new administration. I met with Clinton’s new Russia advisor, Strobe Talbott, but discovered that he was largely unaware of the pressing economic realities. He asked me to send him some materials about hyperinflations, which I duly did.

At the end of 1992, after one year of trying to help Russia, I told Gaidar that I would step aside as my recommendations were not heeded in Washington or the European capitals.  Yet around Christmas Day I received a phone call from Russia’s incoming financing minister, Mr. Boris Fyodorov. He asked me to meet him in Washington in the very first days of 1993.  We met at the World Bank. Fyodorov, a gentleman and highly intelligent expert who tragically died young a few years later, implored me to remain as an advisor to him during 1993.  I agreed to do so, and spent one more year attempting to help Russia implement a stabilization plan. I resigned in December 1993, and publicly announced my departure as advisor in the first days of 1994.  

My continued advocacy in Washington once again fell on deaf ears in the first year of the Clinton Administration, and my own forebodings became greater.  I repeatedly invoked the warnings of history in my public speaking and writing, as in this piece in the New Republic in January 1994, soon after I had stepped aside from the advisory role.      

Above all, Clinton should not console himself with the thought that nothing too serious can happen in Russia. Many Western policymakers have confidently predicted that if the reformers leave now, they will be back in a year, after the Communists once again prove themselves unable to govern. This might happen, but chances are it will not. History has probably given the Clinton administration one chance for bringing Russia back from the brink; and it reveals an alarmingly simple pattern. The moderate Girondists did not follow Robespierre back into power. With rampant inflation, social disarray and falling living standards, revolutionary France opted for Napoleon instead. In revolutionary Russia, Aleksandr Kerensky did not return to power after Lenin's policies and civil war had led to hyperinflation. The disarray of the early 1920s opened the way for Stalin's rise to power. Nor was Bruning'sgovernment given another chance in Germany once Hitler came to power in 1933.

It is worth clarifying that my advisory role in Russia was limited to macroeconomic stabilization and international financing.  I was not involved in Russia’s privatization program which took shape during 1993-4, nor in the various measures and programs (such as the notorious “shares-for-loans” scheme in 1996) that gave rise to the new Russian oligarchs.  On the contrary, I opposed the various kinds of measures that Russia was undertaking, believing them to be rife with unfairness and corruption.  I said as much in both the public and in private to Clinton officials, but they were not listening to me on that account either.  Colleagues of mine at Harvard were involved in the privatization work, but they assiduously kept me far away from their work. Two were later charged by the US government with insider dealing in activities in Russia which I had absolutely no foreknowledge or involvement of any kind.  My only role in that matter was to dismiss them from the Harvard Institute for International Development for violating the internal HIID rules against conflicts of interest in countries that HIID advised.  

The failure of the West to provide large-scale and timely financial support to Russia and the other newly independent nations of the former Soviet Union definitely exacerbated the serious economic and financial crisis that faced those countries in the early 1990s.  Inflation remained very high for several years.  Trade and hence economic recovery were seriously impeded.  Corruption flourished under the policies of parceling out valuable state assets to private hands.  

All of these dislocations gravely weakened the public trust in the new governments of the region and the West. This collapse in social trust brought to my mind at the time the adage of Keynes in 1919, following the disaster Versailles settlement and the hyperinflations that followed: “There is no subtler, no surer means of over- turning the existing basis of society than to debauch the currency. The process engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction, and it does it in a manner which not one man in a million is able to diagnose.” 

During the tumultuous decade of the 1990s, Russia’s social services fell into decline.  When this decline was coupled with the greatly increased stresses on society, the result was a sharp rise in Russia’s alcohol-related deaths.  Whereas in Poland, the economic reforms were accompanied by a rise in life expectancy and public health, the very opposite occurred in crisis-riven Russia.  

Even with all of these economic debacles, and with Russia’s default in 1998, the grave economic crisis and lack of Western support were not the definitive breaking points of US-Russian relations.  In 1999, when Vladimir Putin became Prime Minister and in 2000 when he became President, Putin sought friendly and mutually supportive international relations between Russia and the West.  Many European leaders, for example, Italy’s Romano Prodi, have spoken extensively about Putin’s goodwill and positive intentions towards strong Russia-EU relations in the first years of his presidency.  

It was in military affairs rather than in economics that the Russian – Western relations ended up falling apart in the 2000s.  As with finance, the West was militarily dominant in the 1990s, and certainly had the means to promote strong and positive relations with Russia.  Yet the US was far more interested in Russia’s subservience to NATO that it was in stable relations with Russia.  

At the time of German reunification, both the US and Germany repeatedly promised Gorbachev and then Yeltsin that the West would not take advantage of German reunification and the end of the Warsaw Pact by expanding the NATO military alliance eastward.  Both Gorbachev and Yeltsin reiterated the importance of this US-NATO pledge.  Yet within just a few years, Clinton completely reneged on the Western commitment, and began the process of NATO enlargement.  Leading US diplomats, led by the great statesman-scholar George Kennan, warned at the time that the NATO enlargement would lead to disaster: “The view, bluntly stated, is that expanding NATO would be the most fateful error of American policy in the entire post-cold-war era.” So, it has proved.

Here is not the place to revisit all of the foreign policy disasters that have resulted from US arrogance towards Russia, but it suffices here to mention a brief and partial chronology of key events.  In 1999, NATO bombed Belgrade for 78 days with the goal of breaking Serbia apart and giving rise to an independent Kosovo, now home to a major NATO base in the Balkans.  In 2002, the US unilaterally withdrew from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty over Russia’s strenuous objections.  In 2003, the US and NATO allies repudiated the UN Security Council by going to war in Iraq on false pretenses.  In 2004, the US continued with NATO enlargement, this time to the Baltic States and countries in the Black Sea region (Bulgaria and Romania) and the Balkans.  In 2008, over Russia’s urgent and strenuous objections, the US pledged to expand NATO to Georgia and Ukraine.  

In 2011, the US tasked the CIA to overthrow Syria’s Bashar al-Assad, an ally of Russia.  In 2011, NATO bombed Libya in order to overthrow Moammar Qaddafi.  In 2014, the US conspired with Ukrainian nationalist forces to overthrow Ukraine’s President Viktor Yanukovych.  In 2015, the US began to place Aegis anti-ballistic missiles in Eastern Europe(Romania), a short distance from Russia. In 2016-2020, the US supported Ukraine in undermining the Minsk II agreement, despite its unanimous backing by the UN Security Council.  In 2021, the new Biden Administration refused to negotiate with Russia over the question of NATO enlargement to Ukraine.  In April 2022, the US called on Ukraine to withdraw from peace negotiations with Russia.  

Looking back on the events around 1991-93, and to the events that followed, it is clear that the US was determined to say no to Russia’s aspirations for peaceful and mutually respectful integration of Russia and the West.  The end of the Soviet period and the beginning of the Yeltsin Presidency occasioned the rise of the neoconservatives (neocons) to power in the United States. The neocons did not and do not want a mutually respectful relationship with Russia.  They sought and until today seek a unipolar world led by a hegemonic US, in which Russia and other nations will be subservient.  

In this US-led world order, the neocons envisioned that the US and the US alone will determine the utilization of the dollar-based banking system, the placement of overseas US military bases, the extent of NATO membership, and the deployment of US missile systems, without any veto or say by other countries, certainly including Russia.  That arrogant foreign policy has led to several wars and to a widening rupture of relations between the US-led bloc of nations and the rest of the world.  As an advisor to Russia during two years, late-1991 to late-93, I experienced first-hand the early days of neoconservatism applied to Russia, though it would take many years of events afterwards to recognize the full extent of the new and dangerous turn in US foreign policy that began in the early 1990s.    

[thethirdman8]

Jeffrey Sachs + Q&A | Cambridge Union, the whole talk here.

[wherepond]

Jeffrey Sachs America is changing

Americans hate Israel

Back to Contents

[hale-my-nathan]

Trump Weird News - Trump's Mickey Mouse Economics

[kalopyrgos1]

WHY ARE THEY PRO-PUTIN? I read an interview wth the US economist Jeffrey Sachs. He said in a left-liberal newspaper that the Ukrainian Euromaidan 2014 was a coup d'etat ochestrated by the USA. I researched with Google - and I found page for page almost only this same conspiracy theory. Only very few sites offered informations showing that this is complete nonsense and that the so called "proofs" are worth absolutely nothing. I was very surprised to see an absolute dominance of the Russian propaganda in the internet, on Google. Everybody uses this search engine. Why is this possible? - So it's no wonder that broad sections of the population in the West believe those Russian lies. And they vote for politicians who and parties which tell these lies.

[onionringenjoyer]

MSNBC - Jeffrey Sachs on the Trump-Zelenskyy meeting

So strange they even let him on the air, considering these legacy media networks push imperialist propaganda. The US Empire fears whistleblowers like Sachs.

[archaeocommunologist]

[underthewingsofthblackeagle]

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by FlaviaVeg (@flavia.carocci)

Jeffrey Sachs, speaking Truth to Power.

[averycanadianfilm]

Professor Jeffrey Sachs + Q&A | Cambridge Union

Oct 30, 2024

Professor Jeffrey Sachs delivers a speech and Q&A at 6pm in the Debating Chamber on Tuesday 22nd October 2024. Jeffrey gives a short speech about “whether there can ever truly be a liberal international order?” followed by a few questions from Speakers Officer Alex Mitchell and then further questions from members of the audience. 

PROFESSOR JEFFREY D. SACHS 

Jeffrey D. Sachs is University Professor and Director of the Center for Sustainable Development at Columbia University, where he directed the Earth Institute from 2002 until 2016. He is also President of the UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network, Co-Chair of the Council of Engineers for the Energy Transition, Commissioner of the UN Broadband Commission for Development, academician of the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences at the Vatican, and Tan Sri Jeffrey Cheah Honorary Distinguished Professor at Sunway University. He has been Special Advisor to three United Nations Secretaries-General, and currently serves as an SDG Advocate under Secretary General António Guterres. He spent over twenty years as a professor at Harvard University, where he received his B.A., M.A., and Ph.D. degrees. Sachs has received 42 honorary doctorates, and his recent awards include the 2022 Tang Prize in Sustainable Development, the Legion of Honor by decree of the President of the Republic of France, and the Order of the Cross from the President of Estonia. 

His most recent books are The Ages of Globalization: Geography, Technology, and Institutions (2020) and Ethics in Action for Sustainable Development (2022). Chapters: 

00:00 - Introduction 

01:23 - Can There Ever Truly Be A Liberal international Order? 

14:48 - Jeffrey Sachs in conversation with Alex Mitchell 

39:02 - Audience Q&A

[fspgrad]

Is the U.S. Leading Us to Nuclear War? Jeffrey Sachs on Power, Politics,...

In this episode of Slo Mo with Mo Gawdat, we wrap up our special miniseries, "It's Not What They Told You," with a powerful conversation featuring renowned economist and Columbia University professor Jeffrey Sachs. Known for his deep insights into global politics, economics, and international relations, Jeffrey sheds light on the dark realities behind U.S. foreign policy, the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, and the growing threat of nuclear war. Together, we explore how power is truly wielded on the global stage, and what this means for the future of peace and stability worldwide.

[toastyslayingbutter]

A fun watch.

[thethirdman8]

Professor Jeffrey Sachs speaking at the Cambridge Union recently. Short.

[wherepond]

Jeffrey Sachs Ukraine

Jeffrey Sachs' explosive address at the EU Parliament sends shockwaves acress Europe

Jeffrey Sachs Ukraine

Jeffrey Sachs in Brussels on best money America can spend

Jeffrey Sachs Ukraine & Middle East

Jeffrey Sachs' EU Parliament explosive speech shakes Europe & Middle East

Back to Contents

[lemondeabicyclette]

Piers 💩 Morgan accuse son invité d'être pro-Poutine et reçoit une magistrale leçon d'histoire de Jeffrey Sachs : « Alors quand il s'agit de savoir qui est digne de confiance … »

[Juillet 2022, notre billet du même Sachs sur la crédibilité des vendeurs de vax.]

[specialists-opinions]

Prof. Jeffrey Sachs : Will Trump Dump Netanyahu?

292,382 views • Streamed live on May 13, 2025

Prof. Jeffrey Sachs : Will Trump Dump Netanyahu?

Transcript

0:00[Music] 0:10[Music]

0:23

hi everyone Judge Andrew Npalitano here for Judging Freedom Today is Monday May 12th 2025 Professor Jeffrey Sax is here Here's the topic Will Donald Trump dump Benjamin Netanyahu

but first this While the markets are giving us whiplash have you seen the price of gold it's soaring In the past 12 months gold has risen to more than $3,000 an ounce

I'm so glad I bought my gold it's not too late for you to buy yours

The same experts that predicted gold at $3,200 an ounce now predict gold at 4500 or more in the next year What's driving the price higher paper currencies All around the world they are falling in value Big money is in panic As falling currencies shrink the value of their paper wealth That's why big banks and billionaires are buying gold in record amounts As long as paper money keeps falling they'll keep buying and gold will keep rising So do what I did Call my friends at Lear Capital You'll have a great conversation

and they'll send you very helpful information Learn how you can store gold in your IRA tax and penaltyfree or have it sent directly to your doorstep There's zero pressure to buy and you have a 100% risk-free purchase guarantee

It's time to see if gold is right for you Call 8005114620 8005114620 or go to leerjudgenap.com

and tell them your friend the judge sent you Professor Saxs welcome here Thank you for accommodating uh my schedule Is there reason in your understanding to believe Western press reports that President Trump is getting sick and tired of Prime Minister Netanyahu well let's just say there's good reason

2:28for him to be getting sick of Prime

2:30Minister Netanyahu Whether he act

2:32whether he actually is or not I I can't

2:35vouch for it But there is very good

2:38reason for the president of the United

2:41States to uh say to the uh Arab

2:45counterparts that he'll be meeting with

2:47that the United States is going to

2:48pursue a foreign policy of US interests

2:52in the Middle East not of an extremist

2:56Israeli government's uh delusional

3:00approach And that would lead actually to

3:04peace if President Trump says this We

3:07haven't had a president pursue American

3:10interests in the Middle East for a very

3:11long time Biden simply did what

3:15Netanyahu said It got America into a

3:18deeper and deeper mess President Trump

3:21has the opportunity to extricate the

3:25United States from the profound mess

3:27that Netanyahu has caused And that mess

3:31specifically is wars all over the Middle

3:35East President Trump likes peace He

3:38likes uh business He likes development

3:42And all of that is possible if President

3:45Trump says "I'm not following the

3:49madness of Israel's extremism I'm going

3:53to pursue a normal approach." That means

3:57recognizing the state of Palestine

4:00alongside the state of Israel It means

4:03uh agreeing with the Arab peace

4:06initiative of the last 23 years that

4:09there can be normaly there can be peace

4:12there can be normal relations between

4:15the Arab world and Israel But Israel

4:18can't have it all It can't just keep

4:21expanding into other people's

4:22territories It has to live within its

4:25borders and then it can live peacefully

4:27and normally with the rest of the Middle

4:30East including the Palestinians

4:31including the Saudi Arabia including uh

4:34the Gulf region including Egypt But it

4:36has to stop expanding It has to live

4:40within its legal borders In the past

4:43three weeks the following has happened

4:45Mike Waltz was fired and the White House

4:47leaked that he was fired because he was

4:51secretly negotiating planning plotting

4:54conniving I'm using some of their words

4:56and I'm paraphrasing with Prime Minister

4:58Netanyahu The US negotiated directly

5:01with Hamas bypassing the Israelis and

5:04that resulted in the release of a joint

5:07US uh Israeli citizen IDF soldier Today

5:11the US provided humanitarian assistance

5:14to Gaza or announced that it will And

5:16the American ambassador to the US an

5:19arch Zionist said "We don't need

5:21Israel's permission." The US stopped the

5:24killing in Yemen The US sent its B-52

5:27bombers home to San Diego All this

5:30without notice to

5:33Netanyahu This is all extremely

5:36promising I would add one more huge item

5:39and that is President Trump's very smart

5:43approach to ending the war in Ukraine as

5:46well over the objections of the neocons

5:50in Washington and the traditional

5:52hardliners and those who would be saying

5:54you've got to back Netanyahu no matter

5:56what President Trump has demonstrated he

6:00wants peace He wants the wars to end

6:03

When it came to the case of Ukraine he heard accurately for the war to end NATO expansion needs to be stopped He said that to the Russian side Now there's going to be negotiations between Russia and Ukraine later this week

The President Trump may may actually attend if the news reports are accurate In the case of the Middle East if the president hears and understands very clearly there cannot be peace

There cannot be normalization between Saudi Arabia or the other Gulf countries and Israel except if there is a state of Palestine on the 4th of June 1967 borders that is the internationally legal borders then uh if he if he hears that and responds accurately to it then all of the uh items that you mentioned uh of showing

7:01the independence putting American

7:04strategic interests above what he's

7:06hearing from Netanyahu would come to

7:09fruition The president could actually

7:13bring peace to the Middle East for the

7:15first time really in a century By the

7:17way he can do that if he says yes I see

7:23the reality There must be a state of

7:26Palestine alongside the state of Israel

7:29on the internationally recognized

7:31borders The United States will lift the

7:34veto that Biden used in the UN Security

7:39Council to block Palestine's membership

7:42in the UN The US will accept Palestine

7:46as

7:47a UN member state All UN member states

7:51come in on the condition that they are

7:53peace- seeeking states that Palestine

7:56would enter as the 194th UN member state

8:00This could be done within days Basically

8:05President Trump could say this during

8:07this trip We would see history being

8:10made If he follows the Netanyahu line

8:13it's not going to happen Well Jeeoff I

8:15hope he listens to you Here's what he

8:17said just a few minutes ago

8:19uh in the Oval Office teasing uh the

8:23reporters that were I don't think he was

8:24in the Oval Office but he was in the

8:25White House teasing the reporters that

8:27were there Chris uh number

8:29six and I think you may have a good

8:32result out of the Thursday meeting in

8:33Turkey between Russia and Ukraine and I

8:37believe the two leaders were going to be

8:39there I was thinking about flying over I

8:40don't know where I'm going to be on

8:41Thursday I've got so many meetings but

8:44uh I was thinking about actually flying

8:46over there there's a possibility of it I

8:48guess if I think things can happen

8:52You know he's just the type to do

8:54something radical like that Now this was

8:56just released a few minutes ago

8:58Professor Saxs from a closed session of

9:03the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense

9:06Committee You're probably familiar with

9:08their committee structure Prime Minister

9:11Netanyahu quote this is stated in Hebrew

9:15but we used AI to translate it I think

9:18we will need to wean ourselves off

9:22American military aid Close quote If he

9:26said that what does that tell you

9:29Professor Saxs

9:31well that would uh indicate that he

9:36recognizes that the US is going to

9:38pursue a different foreign policy not to

9:42support his wars This would be wonderful

9:46news It might suggest that he has the

9:49advanced notice that President Trump is

9:52going to call for a state of Palestine

9:55as a UN member state That's the

9:57breakthrough that we need above all If

10:00it happens and if this quote suggests

10:02that of course we're reading a lot into

10:04it but if it suggests that that is

10:06phenomenal news It's interesting by the

10:09way We should understand how many uh

10:12foreign policy uh initiatives President

10:16Trump is engaged in just this moment

10:19that look positive right now And this is

10:23astounding First is Ukraine I think he

10:26is maneuvering to get that war ended and

10:29he's doing it very successfully with the

10:33US China today uh the agreement to roll

10:38back the uh tariffs that went to the

10:42stratosphere uh a few weeks ago This is

10:45very good news with the president

10:48intervening in the India Pakistan

10:52uh battle of of the last few days to

10:56bring together a ceasefire with the

10:58president overriding Waltz apparently

11:02and certainly Netanyahu to say no we're

11:05not going to have wars with Iran All of

11:08these are peaceing initiatives It's a

11:11it's amazing Uh and if it's true

11:15President Trump will make history It's

11:18very close He needs to

11:21understand and really needs to uh to to

11:25to see that if he says two-state

11:30solution no nonsense this is the real

11:33thing all his other goals will be

11:37achievable And that is a a remarkable

11:41remarkable fact But think of the um the

11:45ramifications of this quote Assuming

11:47that Netanyahu said it I think we will

11:50need to wean ourselves off American

11:52military aid Where are they going to go

11:56give them what the US gave them I'll

11:58I'll tell you where they would have to

12:00go They would have to go to normaly to

12:03diplomacy to peace There is no military

12:08alternative for them other than the US

12:11And if President Trump finally stops the

12:15US backing of these military adventures

12:19they have no other place to go What they

12:22will have to do is wean themselves off

12:24of a 30-year

12:27uh addiction to

12:31war have to go to real diplomacy real

12:35diplomacy with the Arab neighbors real

12:38diplomacy with Palestine But most

12:41importantly and I think this is the key

12:43point President Trump can bring about

12:45peace by recognizing the state of

12:48Palestine Right because that will bring

12:52the entire Arab world which has

12:55repeatedly said that's the precondition

12:57for normaly It will bring the 57

13:00countries of the organization of Islamic

13:03cooperation all to say yes This is what

13:07we have been saying for decades This is

13:10finally coming to reality bring about a

13:13collapse of the Netanyahu government

13:16most likely But you know in this world

13:20it's so important to understand the

13:23world cannot be organized for the

13:26survival of a particular incumbent

13:29especially one that has

13:32made egregious

13:34uh errors if you want to be uh if if you

13:38want to be uh charable

13:42I don't know very charitable about it or

13:45egregious crimes if you want to take a

13:47different approach the world cannot be

13:50organized for the sake of a few

13:53individuals it can't be organized for

13:55the sake of Netanyahu it can't be

13:57organized for the sake of Zalinski yes

14:00it should be organized for the sake of

14:02the Ukrainian people for the sake of the

14:04people of Israel for the sake of the

14:05people of Palestine but not for a

14:09particular government And if the

14:11government is extreme if the government

14:14is pursuing an agenda of war when war

14:18absolutely makes no sense for their

14:20population nor for the United States the

14:24US role is to say we pursue peace The

14:28politics is a different business not the

14:31US business that will be determined by

14:33the people of Ukraine or by the people

14:35of uh Israel But it is business of the

14:39United States to pursue the US interest

14:42and the US interest in Ukraine is peace

14:44and the US interest in the Middle East

14:46is peace and that is within reach of the

14:50US itself

14:52So let me sober up this conversation a

14:55little bit Yes Trump is surrounded by

14:58strong

14:59neocons Strong Trump is also surrounded

15:03by neocon skeptics When I say surrounded

15:06by I'm talking about his national

15:08security people from Nex to Rubio to uh

15:12Sebastian Gorka to Tulsi

15:15Gabbard To a

15:18person they are arch zionists

15:23We have seen this who's he who's he

15:25getting advice from we have seen this

15:28play out in Ukraine as well And I've

15:31seen you know by knowing the the

15:35dayto-day events uh there were lots of

15:38people that were telling President Trump

15:40"No no you you can't push Uh you have to

15:44side with the Europeans You have to side

15:46with Ukrainians." But President Trump

15:49said "No it's in the interest of the

15:51Ukrainians the real interest of the

15:53Ukrainians It's in the real interest of

15:56Russia and it's especially in the real

15:58interest of the United States to have

16:00peace." And so he heard a lot of neocon

16:04rants In fact there were lot of uh

16:06landmines around if I could put it that

16:08way to get to even this stage where both

16:13sides have said there will be

16:14negotiations in Istanbul this week And

16:17now President Trump is saying "Yeah I'll

16:19be there as well." If this happens and

16:22everything's fragile because there are a

16:24lot of wreckers a lot of people who

16:27don't want negotiation a lot of people

16:29who want wars to continue But if it

16:32happens it is because President Trump

16:34persevered in this over the neocon

16:37objections When it comes to Israel this

16:40is absolutely deeply entrained in the US

16:44government and has been for decades

16:46Follow whatever the Israeli government

16:49says but it has led us into countless

16:51wars It's leading to an expansion of war

16:54in the Middle East And what I hope

16:56President Trump will hear in the next 3

16:59days and what I expect him to hear is

17:02from the Arab side we cannot go on like

17:05this any longer It's holding back our

17:08entire region It's frustrating economic

17:11development It's killing a lot of

17:12innocent people But the effects all over

17:16our region are devastating We need peace

17:19and peace is available It's within reach

17:22Mr president do the right thing and we

17:25get peace So I'm hoping that this will

17:27be the the the key that the ones that he

17:30will be listening to are the

17:32counterparts that he will be meeting in

17:34Qatar in the Emirates in the Kingdom of

17:38Saudi Arabia because if they convey a

17:40clear unambiguous message President

17:44Trump will hear that he's meeting with

17:47Galani of all people an al-Qaeda

17:50terrorist and murderer who his own State

17:52Department put a $10 million bounty uh

17:55on his

17:56head And he mentioned in the White House

18:00today he's thinking of listing lifting

18:03all sanctions on Syria Why didn't they

18:05just lift the sanctions on Syria when

18:07Assad was there and save save all this

18:09death and destruction

18:16jeff are you still with us

18:19yes

18:21Were you able to hear what I said about

18:22Galani

18:30so I don't know if I'm I'm sorry we had

18:32a brief flicker of the internet but I'm

18:34I'm back So if you can hear me Good So

18:38Trump is meeting with with Galani the

18:41terrorist who's now the head the nominal

18:44head of the Syrian

18:46government He has also intimated today

18:49in the White House he might lift all

18:51sanctions

18:53Oh it looks like we've lost him

18:58Chris All right we'll wait for uh

19:00Professor Saxs to uh come back with us

19:03What I was presenting to him was the

19:05argument made earlier on this show by um

19:10Scott Ritter that President Trump uh

19:14meeting with Galani and offering to lift

19:17the sanctions on Syria is the president

19:20of the United States meeting with a

19:21person with a $10 million bounty on his

19:23head A wanted terrorist known for

19:26killing Americans and heading an

19:28organization that has been characterized

19:31as a terrorist group Okay Professor Saxs

19:34uh is with us Apologies Oh it's not your

19:37fault Uh I won't say where you are but

19:39you're a long distance from here Uh

19:41President Trump is planning to meet with

19:43Al Jalani the nominal head of the Syrian

19:47uh government Uh an al-Qaeda terrorist

19:50who's killed Americans with his bare

19:52hands and on whose head the Trump's own

19:54State Department had and then removed a

19:57$10 million uh bounty Trump himself

20:01intimated earlier today in the White

20:03House he might lift the sanctions on

20:05Syria Why didn't they just lift the

20:07sanctions when Assad was there instead

20:09of going through all this killing

20:12well this is a a key point uh that takes

20:17us back to 2011 when uh President

20:21Obama very mistakenly and egregiously

20:26launched a regime change operation

20:30against uh Syria uh he uh ordered the

20:35CIA in a operation called Operation

20:38Timber Sycamore to uh engage with uh

20:42others in the region to overthrow the

20:45Syrian government This led to 14 years

20:50of mass bloodshed destruction hundreds

20:53of thousands of deaths for absolutely no

20:57reason This is typical neocon policy And

21:02again Israel has been a main proponent

21:06of these kinds of wars in the Middle

21:08East They have been disastrous for the

21:10United States When it comes to the

21:13situation today we made this situation

21:17We made this mess Now it's uh time to

21:21solve this crisis And again I'm not

21:24inside any of the discussions when it

21:27comes to Syria right now but uh the

21:30reason we got to this stage was the US

21:34itself blundering along on the neocon

21:38pattern following the lead of Netanyahu

21:41and others across the Middle East making

21:44war not peace So I hope that President

21:49Trump has a peace strategy together with

21:53other regional powers with Turkey with

21:56Egypt with Saudi Arabia That's

21:59absolutely essential

22:03Well the next few days will be very key

22:06to see how this uh develops I mean you

22:10and I both know his personality He likes

22:12to tease what's on his mind teasing that

22:15he might go uh to Turkey Maybe he'll go

22:19to Thran and meet with Putin uh and the

22:22head of the Iranian government and cut a

22:26deal These these days are

22:29absolutely pivotal for the world As I

22:32said it's extraordinary

22:34Ukraine Israel Palestine Iran uh India

22:39Pakistan and China are all absolutely

22:43active on the foreign policy agenda

22:46right now this moment this day This is

22:49an overload But on all of these there is

22:53the chance for a peaceful outcome

22:56President Trump is actually pursuing the

22:59peaceful outcome on each of these right

23:02now I hope he sticks with that and

23:05perseveres over naysayers over the

23:09neocons and so on because he has a

23:12chance to make a historic breakthrough

23:15that is absolutely phenomenal and I

23:18think we should be rooting for that

23:20success I hope he's listening to you I

23:23know he has listened to you in the past

23:26We know that he posted a clip of a

23:29brilliant speech that you gave uh at

23:32Cambridge University which was harshly

23:34critical of Prime Minister Netanyahu and

23:36he posted that port you spoke about

23:39other items He posted that portion of it

23:41So somebody in the White House is aware

23:43of what you say and gets this to the

23:46president and some of it maybe please

23:48Lord much of it he finds attractive and

23:52compelling Professor Sax thank you very

23:54much for your time Thanks for a great

23:57conversation Thanks for the optimism for

23:59the first time in your voice and tone

24:01and in and in the events that are

24:03happening We may have to come back to

24:06you later this week if these things

24:08happen as we'll do that Let's hope for

24:10some good news Let's hope and we'll talk

24:12very soon Yes Thank you professor All

24:14the best Great Byebye Bye Coming up

24:18tomorrow on all of these topics Tuesday

24:20at 8 in the morning Ambassador Charles

24:23Freeman at 11 in the morning Colonel

24:26Douglas McGregor At 3 in the afternoon

24:30Colonel Karen Quatowski Trust the Paul

24:32Tano for Judging Freedom

24:40[Music]

24:50[Music]

[doylewesleywalls]

Jeffrey Sachs on Donald Trump