From the River to the Sea: Ibaitik Itsasora (125) eta Jeffrey Sachs (2)

@tobararbulu # mmt@tobararbulu

Jeffrey Sachs: Why U.S. is the biggest obstacle to global peace

(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKQZNP2QqfQ)

As the world marks 80 years since the end of #WWII, renowned economist and UN advisor Professor #JeffreySachs offers a powerful critique of America’s global role and mindset.

In this in-depth interview, Sachs argues that the United States’ quest for dominance – not just Russian or Chinese rivalry – is the primary barrier to effective diplomacy and sustainable peace today.

Transkripzioa:

0:00

So Jeffrey, great to have you on the

0:01

show. So as we mark as we mark 80 years

0:05

since the end of the Second World War,

0:07

do you think that this shared history

0:10

still carries weight today as foundation

0:13

for further dialogue or mutual

0:15

understanding?

0:18

Unfortunately, not very much. uh uh

0:21

leaders in the United States seem to

0:24

forget that China and Russia or the

0:28

Soviet Union then were allies in the war

0:32

in World War II. Now from the US

0:36

political vantage point, both Russia and

0:39

China are regarded as enemies. This is a

0:42

a tragedy. It’s a huge mistake. It’s a

0:46

failure of memory. It’s a failure of

0:48

perspective. and it’s uh quite

0:50

dangerous.

0:51

And what do you think are the major

0:52

reasons behind this?

0:55

I think there’s one overwhelming reason

0:58

uh and that is the US self understanding

1:03

uh that it should dominate the world. Uh

1:05

the US ideology

1:08

is one of dominance or primacy or

1:12

hegemony depending on what word you’d

1:15

like to choose. But the US

1:19

political system uh the political class

1:24

views itself as the rightful uh rulers

1:28

of the world in in essence. Of course in

1:31

in my view this is utterly delusional

1:34

but it means that there is not effective

1:37

diplomacy, mutual respect, mutual

1:41

accommodation. The US pushes its

1:47

desires up against the other major

1:51

powers relentlessly. Uh in the case of

1:54

Russia, for example, the main uh US

1:58

action over the last 30 years has been

2:00

to expand NATO to abandon the nuclear

2:05

arms control framework. The US walked

2:07

out of the anti-bballistic missile

2:10

treaty in 2002. It walked out of the

2:12

intermediate nuclear force treaty in

2:14

2019.

2:16

It has declared its aim to expand NATO

2:21

to Ukraine and to Georgia uh putting uh

2:24

Russian security uh in great risk. When

2:29

it comes to uh East Asia, obviously the

2:32

United States has built up uh its

2:35

military all along China’s rimlands and

2:40

its sealanes uh and the United States

2:44

arms Taiwan over the voseiferous

2:48

objections of Beijing. So all of this is

2:51

a demonstration of the US attitude that

2:55

it can and should do what it wants to do

3:00

anywhere in the world irrespective of

3:03

principles of reciprocity of prudence uh

3:07

of international law and I think that

3:10

this is the biggest problem we face

3:14

especially since the United States is

3:16

hardly

3:18

you know the hegemonic power in the

3:20

world. This is a multipolar world that

3:22

we’re in. Uh but the US seems to believe

3:25

that it still has

3:29

preeminence militarily, financially,

3:32

technologically in ways that are simply

3:35

not true. That discordance of reality

3:40

and uh self-promotion is to my mind the

3:44

single most dangerous element of the

3:46

world today. It seems like you believe

3:48

it’s all America’s fault.

3:50

I I think it’s predominantly America’s

3:53

fault because America has been the most

3:56

powerful country in the world, but not

3:58

the only power. But by being the most

4:01

powerful country in the world, it had

4:03

the opportunity to shape a lasting

4:06

peace. It had the opportunity to

4:09

exercise restraint. uh in the question

4:12

of NATO for example indeed most

4:15

Americans don’t know and all political

4:18

leaders in the United States lie about

4:20

it but the United States promised

4:23

President Gorbachev in February 1990

4:27

that NATO would not move one inch

4:29

eastward but the US proaricated and then

4:33

it completely violated its own promise.

4:37

When it comes to Taiwan, the United

4:39

States adopts the one China policy

4:42

ostensibly.

4:44

In the 1982 communique with Beijing, it

4:48

said it would phase out its armed sales

4:51

to Taiwan, but it’s not phasing them

4:53

out. It’s phasing them up. Um, and so

4:56

the reason that I put so much

4:58

responsibility on the United States is

5:01

the fact that the US is the only country

5:04

in the world that has military bases all

5:07

over the world. Uh, in 80 countries,

5:10

perhaps 750

5:12

or so military bases. The United States

5:15

is the only country that presumes to

5:19

dictate rules to others. The US is the

5:21

country that puts unilateral sanctions

5:24

on other countries making demands. So

5:27

this is why I put the responsibility on

5:30

the US side. Now, if the US were truly

5:33

uh acting in a prudent and restrained

5:36

manner, if the United States was showing

5:39

uh respect to Russian national security

5:43

interests and to China’s national

5:45

security interests and despite that uh

5:49

China or Russia was somehow provoking,

5:52

then I would have a different view. But

5:54

the view that I have is based on the

5:56

actual uh historical experience of the

5:59

last 30 years where the uh I would say

6:04

the uh aggravating factors have been US

6:08

actions whether NATO enlargement,

6:11

abandoning the nuclear framework or many

6:14

wars of choice that the United States

6:17

has undertaken in Afghanistan, in Iraq,

6:20

in Syria, in Libya. uh and uh the

6:24

rampant use of these unilateral

6:28

sanctions which are also against

6:30

international law. So that’s that’s why

6:32

I personally view this as something that

6:35

the United States needs to control, can

6:39

control, should control, and should have

6:41

controlled.

6:42

Well, Jeffrey, at present, we’re

6:44

witnessing two major wars in Europe and

6:47

the Middle East. In the meantime, the

6:48

United States has launched this tariff

6:50

wall on the world, fueling uncertainty

6:53

and instability. So from your

6:56

perspective, do you think we are heading

6:58

towards another major conflict? Do you

7:01

think we’re going to have the third

7:02

world war?

7:06

It can’t be ruled out. Uh first of all,

7:09

we know in history that even the

7:12

improbable

7:14

can happen and the results can be vastly

7:18

more devastating than anyone could have

7:21

imagined. I think 1914 August is vivid

7:26

enough. Uh Europe was prosperous. Uh

7:30

there was no cause for war. The

7:34

assassination of the archduke of the

7:38

Hapsburg Empire became the occasion for

7:42

what turned into a mass slaughter of

7:45

millions of people. Uh and uh when that

7:49

war broke out in August 1914

7:53

and the armies confidently marched out

7:56

to the battlefield, they thought it

7:57

would be a 30-day affair. It turned out

8:00

to be a 4-year bloody catastrophe uh

8:05

that cast a shadow until today uh more

8:09

than a century later. Uh so there’s lots

8:13

of unpredictability

8:15

and um we have so many flash points. We

8:19

have so many irresponsible leaders in

8:22

the United States. We have so many

8:25

accidents waiting to happen. uh we have

8:28

uh the US and and UK which is also an

8:33

unbelievably irresponsible uh government

8:36

um that is essentially launching

8:40

missiles into Russia which you can’t

8:44

imagine a more clear provocation when

8:48

Ukraine uh pushes the button everybody

8:52

understands that it’s US weapon systems,

8:55

US intelligence, US tracking, US

8:57

personnel in fact enabling uh those

9:01

missile attacks. So uh how can one rule

9:04

out uh anything in in this kind of

9:07

context? You have a president of the

9:09

United States with with an attention

9:11

span of 15 minutes uh who makes threats

9:15

and ultimatums to other countries uh who

9:18

is complicit in a genocide that is

9:22

ongoing in Gaza. It’s not a pretty

9:25

picture. It’s quite a dangerous picture.

9:27

What has kept us out of war is the

9:29

prudence of China and of Russia actually

9:33

because Russia has not retaliated even

9:36

when clearly the western security

9:39

agencies supported Ukraine for example

9:43

to attack part of Russia’s nuclear triad

9:47

just a few weeks ago. Well,

9:51

this is such a um an unbelievably

9:55

reckless kind of action that the West

9:58

takes, but uh the Russian response was

10:02

not to uh escalate that uh further.

10:07

What’s missing in all of this, I have to

10:09

say, is true diplomacy. True diplomacy

10:13

is not that the United States dictates

10:17

you must have an unconditional ceasefire

10:19

in 10 days. That’s not diplomacy. True

10:22

diplomacy is you sit, you discuss, you

10:26

negotiate, you listen to the other side,

10:29

you take into account uh the concerns of

10:33

the other side, you find a mutual

10:36

accommodation.

10:38

One of the things of the Ukraine war,

10:41

for example, is the Americans demand an

10:44

immediate ceasefire unconditional.

10:47

The Russians say, well, there are root

10:50

causes of this war, notably NATO

10:53

enlargement. Uh the coup that the US

10:56

helped to lead in February 2014 that

11:00

brought this regime to power in uh

11:02

Ukraine

11:04

and so forth. The United States doesn’t

11:07

want to discuss any of those root

11:08

causes. That means no diplomacy. Or look

11:12

at the war in Gaza. Israel is starving

11:16

2 million people in front of our eyes.

11:19

People are dying every day. They go to

11:21

the food emergency points and then the

11:25

Israeli soldiers shoot at them and kill

11:28

them in cold blood in front of the

11:30

cameras. No denying it. Then you you

11:34

have Israelis bragging about all of

11:36

this. So there’s a genocide that’s

11:39

underway. What does the US say? The US

11:43

uses rhetoric. Release the hostages.

11:45

Release the hostages. Hamas, but it

11:48

doesn’t willingly get to root causes,

11:52

Israel’s occupation of Palestine and the

11:57

need for a two-state solution, which

11:59

more than 180 countries of the United

12:01

Nations believe in. So again, if you

12:06

don’t uh discuss the real political

12:10

issues, uh if you just make demands,

12:13

that’s not diplomacy and it’s also not

12:16

conducive to peace.

12:18

Speaking of diplomacy, Jeffrey, the end

12:20

of the Second World War led to the

12:22

founding of the United Nations. Do you

12:24

believe that postwar institutions like

12:27

the United Nations still reflect the

12:29

realities of today’s multipolar world?

12:33

We need the United Nations more than

12:36

ever because our interconnectedness

12:39

is uh greater than ever. Uh we need

12:42

global governance to stop nuclear

12:46

proliferation

12:47

to protect the earth’s physical systems

12:50

from our self-destruction

12:52

to end wars. So the reason for the UN is

12:58

stronger than ever. the effectiveness of

13:01

the UN is very low right now. And

13:05

understand that I work at and with and

13:08

for the UN and I say this with the uh

13:14

with great sadness uh that we need the

13:17

UN more than ever but it is not

13:20

effective and the reason it’s not

13:21

effective is the United States is in

13:24

open war with the UN. uh the US is the

13:28

country in the world by objective

13:30

criteria that is least aligned with the

13:34

UN charter. I do a study each year

13:37

measuring each uh government’s alignment

13:40

with the the UN charter, general

13:43

assembly and UN security council, UN

13:46

agencies and the US comes out last of

13:49

the 193 countries. So the country that

13:52

essentially invented the UN because this

13:55

was the brainchild of our greatest

13:58

President Franklin Roosevelt um is now

14:01

in open battle with the UN. Open battle

14:05

on on every front. It uses its veto in

14:09

the security council to stop war to

14:13

prevent the uh emergence of peace, for

14:16

example, in the Middle East or to

14:18

implement the two-state solution. Uh it

14:21

walks out of the Paris climate

14:23

agreement. It doesn’t pay its dues to

14:26

the UN. It leaves uh UN organizations

14:29

like UNESCO and World Health

14:32

Organization. It doesn’t sign UN

14:34

treaties. So all of this has weakened

14:37

the UN. Uh the UN needs a UN 2.0.

14:43

In other words, don’t be cynical and

14:45

give up on the UN. Understand its uh

14:49

vital role in the world and strengthen

14:52

the UN.

14:53

What is the UN 2.0 and do you think what

14:56

happened to the League of Nations will

14:58

happen to the UN? Now

15:00

the League of Nations is of course the

15:03

dire possibility that we face. What

15:06

happened with the League of Nations is

15:07

that it was founded in 1921

15:10

and then when the crisis of the 1930s

15:13

came, it proved inactive and incapable

15:17

of maintaining the peace. And now we

15:20

have the UN uh in the face of an ongoing

15:24

war in Ukraine, in face of the

15:26

catastrophe in uh Gaza, in face of the

15:33

growing environmental crisis uh in which

15:36

the UN treaties play a central role. uh

15:40

and the UN uh as an organization

15:46

cannot respond adequately partly because

15:48

the US puts vetos in place partly

15:52

because the UN doesn’t have a a

15:55

dedicated budget that is adequate to the

15:59

task and the United States and other

16:02

countries don’t pay even the tiny

16:05

amounts that they’re due under uh the

16:09

core UN budget. Uh UN Security Council

16:14

resolutions come and go without being

16:17

enforced. So all of this means that we

16:21

need an upgraded UN system. The UN needs

16:25

its own uh adequate financing. I have

16:29

recommended that taxes be put on

16:32

international shipping, on international

16:35

aviation, on international financial

16:38

transactions, on emissions of carbon

16:40

dioxide, on other uh tax bases that

16:45

should provide directly the revenues

16:47

that one needs for global governance. I

16:51

have advocated repeatedly for the UN

16:55

Security Council to be upgraded. of

16:58

course for the whole veto process to be

17:01

overhauled so that one country cannot

17:04

willfully oppose the uh overwhelming

17:08

consensus of the global community which

17:11

is exactly what the United States is

17:13

doing today for example in the question

17:16

of Israel’s genocide in Gaza uh there

17:20

are many other reforms that have been

17:24

recommended for the UN including uh also

17:28

even a a UN parliament alongside the UN

17:31

General Assembly. In other words, making

17:33

the UN biccameal, two chambers, one that

17:37

is one country, one vote and one that is

17:41

more representative of population uh in

17:44

a kind of global parliament. I think

17:48

this is a very good idea actually. And

17:50

do you think that and do you think sorry

17:52

do you think that will help stabilize

17:54

world governance after the reforms you

17:56

suggested?

17:58

The the most basic point

18:01

is that we have moved from a bipolar

18:05

cold war to a self-proclaimed unipolar

18:10

US world to a truly multipolar world.

18:15

That’s the world that we’re in right

18:16

now. But we don’t have the

18:19

multilateralism.

18:20

We don’t have the ethics, the spirit,

18:24

the diplomacy or the UN institutional

18:28

mechanisms for a safe and fair and

18:32

lawbased multipolarity.

18:35

So the world’s different now 80 years

18:37

after uh the end of World War II. we can

18:41

see uh why the UN is essential and also

18:45

why it’s not working. The United States

18:49

clings to its uh selfdeclared hegemony

18:53

or primacy at great risk to the whole

18:57

world. So when you ask will we get to

19:00

something new, we will when the need for

19:06

it is clear to everybody and when the US

19:11

opposition finally waines and it will

19:16

wayne for two reasons. One is that the

19:19

rest of the world will finally say to

19:20

the United States, you don’t run the

19:23

show. This is basic. It’s what President

19:28

Lula said recently. He said, “We don’t

19:30

need an emperor.” Referring to President

19:32

Trump’s demands on Brazil and on other

19:36

places in the world. And second, when

19:40

the American public opinion, which

19:42

supports the UN and wants an end to the

19:46

wars, finally regains some political

19:50

power because in the US, public opinion

19:53

plays almost no role right now. Uh this

19:57

is a a uh a a government by decree uh

20:02

ruled by

20:04

the military-industrial complex

20:07

irrespective of the will of the American

20:11

people who want peace who want mutual

20:14

accommodation who don’t want the wars in

20:16

the Middle East or Ukraine or in East

20:18

Asia but their voice doesn’t register

20:21

right now. So we can get to a multipolar

20:25

world if uh the bricks and other

20:28

countries say yes uh actually I should

20:32

be more precise we can get to a

20:33

law-abided multilateral world. We

20:36

already are in a multip-olar world, but

20:38

we can get to a multilateral world with

20:41

an effective UN charter if the bricks,

20:44

the African Union, uh, ASEAN, other

20:48

countries in the world say we do not

20:52

want an emperor. We do not take demands

20:54

from any one country. We want to operate

20:57

by the international rule of law. And if

21:01

at the same time we can regain some uh

21:06

measure of uh accountability of the US

21:10

military-industrial complex.

21:12

Thank you very much for insight. Thank

21:14

you.

21:15

Great to be with you. X

oooooo

Professor Jeffrey Sachs TRASHES Mark Rubio into Pieces and Forecasts the Palestine State

(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4hRfGMtBEHk)

About Jeffrey Sachs:

Jeffrey Sachs is an American economist and public policy expert, currently a professor at Columbia University. He previously served as the director of The Earth Institute at the university. His work focuses on sustainable development and economic growth, making him a prominent figure in these fields.

Transkripzioa:

0:00

I don’t know how any of this ends. Uh,

0:02

Professor Saxs, Trump has only been in

0:04

office for uh, eight months. I share

0:06

every one of your uh, criticisms against

0:10

them except that people are dying

0:13

dying horrible horrific deaths and

0:16

nothing seems to come of it. What will

0:19

come of Great Britain, France, Canada, a

0:24

few other countries, I think Spain,

0:26

maybe Portugal recognizing a Palestinian

0:29

state. I don’t think anything until the

0:31

UN Security Council does it. Am I right?

0:34

Well, we have right now 150 countries

0:37

that have recognized the state of

0:39

Palestine. They represent uh around 90%

0:45

of the world population. I need to do an

0:48

update of the arithmetic, but basically

0:52

90 plus% of the world population says

0:55

there needs to be a state of Palestine

0:58

alongside the state of Israel. There was

1:00

a declaration by the Arab countries

1:04

saying that Hamas would be disarmed that

1:09

there would be a normalization of

1:11

relations

1:12

on the basis of a state of Palestine

1:16

alongside the state of Israel. Uh, of

1:18

course, Israel rejected that. This is

1:22

what’s important for everybody to

1:24

understand.

1:25

Israel is not looking for peace. Israel

1:29

is looking for domination.

1:33

This government and much of Israeli

1:36

society is absolutely content on mass

1:40

murder and on ethnic cleansing so that

1:43

Israel retains control over 100%

1:49

of what was uh the so-called British

1:52

mandatory Palestine. In other words, uh

1:55

the land that Britain in its typical

2:00

imperialistic way promised to everybody,

2:03

to the Arabs, to the Jews, to the

2:06

French, to everybody. Uh and uh the

2:09

Zionists said, “We’ll take it all.” And

2:13

they don’t want peace based on two

2:16

states. They want everything. And since

2:19

there just happened to be some millions

2:21

of Arabs living there, they’re just

2:24

going to have to leave or starve to

2:26

death or be killed or submit to

2:31

apartheid rule. That’s all that’s going

2:34

on. There is no attempt at in the United

2:38

States and or Israel to actually make

2:42

peace. But for

2:46

90% of the world, what’s happening is ab

2:49

abhorrent. And for most of American

2:53

citizens who of course play no role in

2:55

our government in foreign policy

2:58

whatsoever, no voice, no say, no

3:01

reflection of our attitudes, we are

3:05

revolted by Israel’s

3:09

extraordinarily

3:11

uh cruel

3:16

I don’t I I lose the words, but it is a

3:18

genocide and and and and and just to say

3:23

we’re it’s two countries now and you ask

3:27

will something come of this yes in the

3:29

end there will be a state of Palestine

3:31

how many people die beforehand is the

3:34

real question but there absolutely will

3:36

be a state of Palestine there is a

3:38

question will there be a state of Israel

3:40

because if Israel is so shockingly

3:46

disgustingly

3:47

brazen in this mass murder

3:50

How is Israel going to go on among the

3:53

community of nations? That’s the real

3:56

question.

3:57

Here’s Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia who

3:59

agrees with you and regrettably

4:02

Secretary of State Marco Rubio who does

4:05

not. Chris, back to back two and three.

4:08

The the international community,

4:10

including the United States, made a

4:11

promise in 1947 that there would be a

4:14

state of Israel and a state for Arabs,

4:17

Palestine, in this space. One promise

4:19

has been met. Nearly 80 years later, one

4:22

promise has not been met. More than a

4:24

hundred nations have done a recognition.

4:26

They’ve said, “Look, we need to meet the

4:28

promise that the international community

4:30

made.” But it needs to be

4:31

conditionsbased. And I think the most

4:33

important condition is recognizing a

4:36

Palestine when they are able to

4:38

peacefully coexist with their neighbors,

4:40

including Israel. And so as I read what

4:43

the nations are saying, it’s not a an

4:45

immediate recognition, no questions

4:47

asked in September. It’s establishing

4:50

conditions um that when they are met,

4:53

Palestine would be recognized. The UK is

4:55

like, well, if Israel doesn’t agree to a

4:57

ceasefire by September, we’re going to

4:58

recognize the Palestinian state. So if

5:00

I’m Hamas, I say, you know what, let’s

5:02

not allow there to be a ceasefire. If

5:04

Hamas refuses to agree to a ceasefire,

5:06

it guarantees a Palestinian state will

5:08

be recognized by all these countries in

5:10

September. So, they’re not going to

5:11

agree to a ceasefire. I mean, it’s so

5:13

clumsy.

5:16

It It’s hard to know whether these

5:19

people like Rubio are so dense that they

5:23

don’t understand anything or so vulgar

5:26

that they obfuscate everything. But

5:30

Rubio’s not working towards a twostate

5:33

solution.

5:34

No.

5:34

What’s his complaint? Do your diplomacy.

5:37

That’s your job,

5:39

Mr. Secretary of State, do your

5:42

diplomacy,

5:44

but you’re not doing any diplomacy.

5:46

So, who are you to say what other

5:49

countries should do? Because you and

5:51

your administration is not engaged in

5:54

diplomacy. It’s engaged in war. War is

5:58

not diplomacy.

6:00

Diplomacy is finding a way to peace.

6:02

What are you doing, Mr. Rubio, to find a

6:04

way to peace and a two-state solution?

6:07

Nothing.

6:09

So every word that Rubio utters is

6:13

either this measure of how dense

6:16

he might be or how much he wants to

6:20

obuscate the most basic point that we

6:23

are complicit in a genocide and do not

6:27

find words for diplomacy which 150 other

6:32

countries have easily recognized. And by

6:35

the way, that’s 150 that have recognized

6:38

Palestine. More than 180 have repeatedly

6:42

voted for Palestinian right to political

6:46

self-determination at the UN year after

6:49

year. That I know the count because I’ve

6:52

done the arithmetic. It’s 95%

6:55

of the world population.

6:57

Do you think that the arguments that

6:58

you’ve made are even articulated in the

7:03

White House? No, I think the uh

7:09

militaryindustrial

7:11

state which runs our country

7:15

lives in a delusion

7:18

of being all powerful and

7:22

thinking that whenever there’s

7:24

resistance all they have to do is

7:26

escalate more arms, more military, more

7:30

war so that they can dictate. This has

7:33

been like this for a long time. Again, I

7:36

don’t find anything particular with

7:38

Trump except how obnoxious things are

7:41

put. But Biden was terrible.

7:44

Trump won same way. Obama terrible.

7:49

Bush terrible. Bush Jr. This is why none

7:53

of these problems get solved. It’s not

7:56

just that Trump’s not solving them.

7:59

The military-industrial state, as

8:01

Eisenhower told us, took over our

8:03

country by the mid 1960s, probably with

8:08

the coup in which President Kennedy was

8:11

assassinated.

8:13

And since then, we don’t have public

8:16

opinion on foreign policy. We don’t have

8:18

American security interests. We just

8:21

have war. And the war is based on a

8:24

delusion that we’re the most powerful so

8:26

that we can dictate terms to everyone

8:28

else. So no, I don’t think that these

8:30

arguments are discussed or debated

8:33

because there is no discussion or debate

8:35

in

oooooo

Viral: When Jeffrey Sachs Warned The World Against ‘Crazy Land’ Chaos, SLAMMING Trump’s Tariffs

(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wppQVUuYFeU)

U.S. economist Jeffrey Sachs’ explosive February 2025 EU Parliament speech goes viral, urging Europe to ditch U.S. reliance and forge an independent foreign policy! Slamming Trump’s 25% reciprocal tariffs as a threat to global markets, Sachs warns, “Don’t trust America,” amid escalating U.S. trade wars with India, China, and the EU. His call for economic sovereignty shakes financial markets! Watch the full breakdown of this trade crisis!

Transkripzioa:

0:00

This is uh indeed a a complicated and fastch changing time and a and and a

0:06

very dangerous one. So we really need clarity of thought. Um I’m especially

0:14

interested in our conversation. So I’ll try to be as succinct and and clear as I

0:20

can be. Uh I’ve watched the events very close up uh in Eastern Europe, the

0:27

former Soviet Union, Russia uh very closely for the last uh 36 years. I was

0:37

an adviser to the Polish government in 1989. Uh to uh President Gorbachev in 1990 and

0:47

91 to President Yelen in 1991 to 1993

0:53

to President Kuchma of Ukraine in 1993 94. I helped introduce the Estonian

1:02

currency. I I helped uh several countries in uh former Yugoslavia,

1:09

especially Slovenia. Uh I’ve watched the events very close up for 36 years.

1:19

After the Maidan, I was uh asked by the new government to come to Kiev and I was

1:25

taken around the Maidan and I learned a lot of things uh firsthand. I I’ve been

1:31

in touch with Russian leaders for more than 30 years.

1:37

I know the American political leadership uh close up uh our previous uh secretary

1:47

of treasury was my macroeconomics teacher uh 51 years ago. Uh just to give

1:54

you an idea. So we were very close friends for a half century. I know all

2:01

of these people. I just want to say this because what I want to explain in my

2:06

point of view is not uh secondhand. It’s not ideology. It’s what I’ve seen with

2:12

my own eyes and experienced during this period

2:18

in my understanding of the events that have befallen Europe in many contexts.

2:26

uh and I’ll include not only the uh Ukraine crisis uh but uh Serbia 1999

2:38

uh the wars in the Middle East including Iraq, Syria, uh the wars in Africa including

2:46

Sudan, Somalia, uh Libya.

2:52

These are to a very significant extent that would surprise you perhaps

2:59

uh and would be denounced about what I’m about to say. These are

3:05

wars that the United States led and caused.

3:10

And this has been true for more than 40 years now.

3:18

what happened uh more than 30 years I should say to be more precise

3:26

the United States came to the view especially in 1990 911 and then with the

3:34

end of the Soviet Union that the US now ran the world

3:41

and that the US did not have to heed anybody’s views

3:47

red lines, concerns, security viewpoints, or any international obligations or any

3:57

UN framework. I’m sorry to put it so plainly, but I do want you to

4:05

understand. I tried very hard in 1991

4:12

to get help for Gorbachev, who I think was the greatest statesman of our modern

4:18

time. I recently read the uh archived memo of

4:24

the National Security Council discussion of my proposal, how they completely

4:31

dismissed it and laughed it off the table when I said that the United States

4:37

should help the Soviet Union in financial stabilization and in making its reforms. and the memo

4:46

documents, including some of my former colleagues at Harvard in particular,

4:51

saying we will do the minimum that we will do to prevent disaster, but

4:58

the minimum, it’s not our job to help. Quite the contrary, it’s not our

5:03

interest to help. When the Soviet Union ended in 1991,

5:10

the view became even more exaggerated and I can name chapter and verse, but

5:18

the view was we run the show. Cheney, Wolawitz, and many other names

5:26

that you will have come to know literally believed this is now a US

5:33

world and we will do as we want. We will

5:39

clean up from the former Soviet Union. We will take out any remaining allies.

5:46

countries like Iraq, Syria, and so forth will go.

5:52

And we’ve been experiencing this foreign policy for now

6:00

essentially 33 years. Europe has paid a heavy price for this

6:07

because Europe has not had any foreign policy during this period that I can figure out.

6:13

No voice, no unity, no clarity, no European interests, only American

6:22

loyalty. There were moments where there were disagreements and very uh I think uh

6:30

wonderful disagreements especially in the last time of significance was 2003

6:37

in the Iraq war when France and Germany said we don’t support the United States

6:44

going around the UN security council for this war. That war, by the way, was

6:50

directly concocted by Netanyahu and his colleagues in the US uh

6:58

Pentagon. I’m not saying that it was a link or mutuality. I’m saying it was a direct

7:06

war. That was a war carried out for Israel. It was a war that Paul Wolitz and

7:13

Douglas Feith coordinated with Netanyahu and that was the last time that Europe

7:21

had a voice. And I spoke with European leaders then

7:28

and they were very clear and it was uh quite wonderful.

7:35

Europe lost its voice entirely after that but especially in 2008.

7:43

Now what happened after 1991 to get to 2008 is that the United States decided

7:51

that unipolarity meant that NATO would enlarge

7:56

somewhere from Brussels to Vladivosto step by step. there would be no end to

8:03

eastward enlargement of NATO. This would be the US unipolar world. If

8:11

you played the game of risk as a child like I did, this is the US idea to have

8:17

the peace on every part of the board. Any place without a US military base is

8:24

an enemy. Basically, neutrality is a dirty word in the US

8:30

political lexicon. Perhaps the dirtiest word. At least if you’re an enemy, we know you’re an

8:36

enemy. Uh if you are neutral, you’re subversive

8:42

because then you’re really against us because you’re not telling us. You’re pretending to be neutral.

8:49

So this was the mindset and the decision was taken formally in 1994

8:56

when President Clinton signed off on NATO enlargement to the east. You will

9:02

recall that in February 7th, 1991,

9:08

Hans Dietra Genture and James Baker III spoke with Gorbachev.

9:14

Genture gave a press conference afterwards where he explained, “NATO

9:20

will not move eastward. We will not take advantage of the

9:26

dissolution of the Warsaw pact.” And understand that was in a jeritical

9:33

context, not a casual context. This was the end of World War II being negotiated for

9:41

German reunification and an agreement was made that NATO will

9:47

not move one inch eastward. And it was explicit and it is in

9:53

countless documents and just look up national security archive of George

9:58

Washington University and you can get dozens of documents. It’s a website called what Gorbachov heard about NATO.

10:08

Take a look because everything you’re told by the US is a lie about this. But

10:14

the archives are perfectly clear. So the decision was taken in 1994

10:22

to expand NATO all the way to Ukraine.

10:27

This is a project. This is not one administration or another. This is a US

10:33

government project that started more than 30 years ago.

10:43

In 1997, Ziggnu Bjinski wrote the grand

10:48

chessboard. That is not just musings of Mr. Bjinski. That is the presentation of the

10:56

decisions of the United States government explained to the public.

11:01

which is how these books work. And the book describes the eastward

11:08

enlargement of Europe and of NATO as simultaneous events.

11:16

And there’s a good chapter in that book that says what will Russia do as Europe

11:23

and NATO expand eastward. And I knew Zig Bjinski personally. He

11:31

was very nice to me. Uh I was advising Poland. He was a big help. He was a very

11:38

nice and smart man. And he got everything wrong.

11:43

So in 1997, he wrote in detail why Russia could do nothing but exceed to

11:51

the eastward expansion of NATO and Europe. In fact, he says the eastward

11:57

expansion of Europe and not just Europe but NATO. This was a plan, a project.

12:05

And he explains how Russia will never align with China.

12:10

Unthinkable. Russia will never align with Iran.

12:15

Russia has no vocation other than the European vocation. So as Europe moves

12:21

east, there’s nothing Russia can do about it. So says yet another American strategist.

12:29

Is it any question why we’re in war all the time?

12:35

Because one thing about America is we always know what our counterparts are going to do and we always get it wrong.

12:44

And one reason we always get it wrong is that in game theory that the American

12:50

strategists play, you don’t actually talk to the other side. You just know

12:56

what the other side’s strategy is. That’s it’s wonderful. It saves so much time.

13:03

You don’t need any diplomacy.

13:09

So this project began and we had a continuity of government for 30 years

13:17

until maybe yesterday perhaps.

13:23

30 years of a project. Ukraine and Georgia were the keys to the project.

13:31

Why? Because America learned everything it knows from the British.

13:39

And so we are the wannabe British Empire.

13:45

And what the British Empire understood in 1853,

13:50

Mr. Palmer, Lord Palmerston, excuse me, is that you surround Russia in the Black

13:57

Sea and you deny Russia access to the Eastern Mediterranean.

14:03

And all you’re watching is an American project to do that in the 21st century.

14:13

The idea was that there would be Ukraine,

14:19

Romania, Bulgaria, Turkey, and Georgia as the Black Sea literal

14:28

that would deprive Russia of any international

14:33

status by blocking the Black Sea and

14:38

essentially by neutralizing Russia as more than a local power. Bjinski is

14:45

completely clear about this and before Bjinsky there was Mckinder

14:51

and who owns the island of the world owns the world. So this project goes

14:58

back a long time. I think it goes back basically to Palmerston

15:05

in 19 and again I’ve lived through every administration. I’ve known these

15:11

presidents. I’ve known their teams. Nothing changed much from Clinton to

15:17

Bush to Obama to Trump won to Biden.

15:23

Maybe they got worse step by step. Biden was the worst in my view. Uh maybe

15:32

also because he was not compass for the last couple of years. And I say that

15:37

seriously, not as a snarky remark. The American political system is a system of

15:44

image. It’s a system of media manipulation every day. It is a PR

15:50

system. And so you could have a president that basically doesn’t function and have that in power for two

15:58

years and actually have that president run for reelection. And one damn thing

16:05

is he had to stand on a stage for 90 minutes by himself and that was the end of it. Had it not been that mistake, he

16:13

would have gone on to have his candidacy whether he was sleeping after 400 p.m.

16:18

in the afternoon or not. So this is actually the reality.

16:24

Everybody goes along with it. It’s impolite to say anything that I’m saying

16:29

because we don’t speak the truth about almost anything in this world right now.

16:35

So this project went on from the 1990s. Bombing Bgrade 78 straight days in 1999

16:45

was part of this project. Splitting apart the country when borders

16:50

are sacrosanked, aren’t they? Indeed, except for Kosovo.

16:55

That’s fine because borders are sacrosanked except when America changes them.

17:03

Sudan was another related project. The South Sudan rebellion. Did that just

17:10

happen because South Sudin rebelled? or can I give you the CIA playbook

17:18

to please understand as grown-ups what this is about.

17:25

Military events are costly. They require equipment, training, base camps,

17:33

intelligence, finance. That comes from big powers.

17:38

That doesn’t come from local insurrections.

17:44

South Sudan did not defeat North Sudan or Sudan

17:50

in a tribal battle. It was a US project.

17:55

I would go often to Nairobi and meet US military or senators or others with deep

18:05

interests in Sudan’s politics. This was part of the game of

18:11

unipolarity. So the NATO enlargement as you know started in 1999 with Hungary, Poland and

18:19

the Czech Republic and Russia was extremely unhappy about it. But these were countries still far

18:27

from the border and Russia protested but of course to no avail. Then George

18:35

Bush Jr. came in when 9/11 occurred. President Putin pledged all support

18:42

and then the US uh decided in September

18:48

20th, 2001

18:54

that it would launch seven wars in five years. And you can listen to General

19:01

Wesley Clark online talk about that. He was NATO Supreme Commander in 1999.

19:08

He went to the Pentagon on September 20th, 2001. He was handed the paper

19:13

explaining seven wars. These, by the way, were Netanyahu’s wars.

19:19

The idea was partly to clean up old Soviet allies and partly to take out

19:26

supporters of Hamas and Hezbollah because Netanyahu’s idea was there will

19:32

be one state. Thank you. Only one state. It will be Israel. Israel will control

19:38

all of the territory and anyone that objects we will overthrow. Not we

19:44

exactly our friend the United States. That’s US policy until this morning.

19:52

We don’t know whether it will change. Now, the only wrinkle is that maybe the

19:57

US will own Gaza instead of Israel owning Gaza.

20:03

But the idea has been around at least for 25 years.

20:08

It actually goes back to a document called Clean Break that Netanyahu and

20:14

his American political team put together in 1996 to end the idea of the two-state

20:22

solution. You can also find it online. So, these are projects. These are

20:28

long-term events. These aren’t is it Clinton, is it Bush, is it Obama.

20:35

That’s the boring way to look at American politics as the dayto-day game, but that’s not

20:41

what American politics is. So, the next round of NATO enlargement

20:47

came in 2004 with seven more countries,

20:52

the three Baltic states, Romania, Bulgaria, Slovenia, and Slovakia.

20:59

At this point, Russia was pretty damn upset. This was a complete violation of the

21:06

postwar order agreed with German reunification.

21:13

Essentially, it was a it it was a fundamental trick or

21:19

defection of the US from a cooperative arrangement is what it amounted to because they

21:26

believe in unipolarity. So, as everybody recalls, because we

21:32

just had the Munich Security Conference last week in 2007, President Putin said, “Stop. Enough.

21:39

Enough. Stop now.” And of course, what that meant was in

21:46

2008, the United States jammed down Europe’s throat enlargement of NATO to

21:51

Ukraine and to Georgia. This is a long-term project. I listened to Mr. Sakashi in New York in

22:00

May of 2008. And I walked out, called Sonia and said, “This man’s crazy.” And

22:07

a month later, a war broke out because the United States told this guy, “We

22:14

save Georgia.” And he stands at the Council on Foreign Relations says Georgia’s in the center of Europe. Well,

22:22

it ain’t, ladies and gentlemen. It’s not in the center of Europe.

22:28

And the most recent events are not helpful for Georgia for its safety and your MPs going there or MEPs going there

22:36

and European politicians. That gets Georgia destroyed. That doesn’t save Georgia. That gets Georgia destroyed.

22:45

Completely destroyed. In 2008, as everybody knows, our former CIA

22:52

director, William Burns, sent a long message back to Condisa Rice. Net means

22:58

net about expansion. This we know from Julian Assange because believe me, not

23:05

one word is told to the American people about anything or to you or by any of

23:11

your newspapers these days. So we have Julian Assange to thank but

23:16

we can read the memo in detail. As you know Victor Yanukovich was

23:23

elected in 2010 on the platform of neutrality. Russia had no territorial

23:31

interests or designs in Ukraine at all. I know I was there during these pe these

23:39

years. What Russia was negotiating was a 25-year lease to 20 42

23:48

for Savasto naval base. That’s it. Not for Crimea, not for the Donbas.

23:55

Nothing like that. This idea that Putin is reconstructing

24:01

the Russian Empire. This is childish propaganda. Excuse me. If anyone knows

24:09

the daytoday and year-to-year history, this is childish stuff.

24:15

Childish stuff seems to work better than adult stuff. So, no designs at all. The United States

24:24

decided this man must be overthrown. It’s called a regime change operation.

24:32

There have been about a hundred of them by the United States. Many in your countries

24:38

and many all over the world. That’s what the CIA does for a living.

24:47

Okay? Please know it. It’s a very unusual kind of foreign policy.

24:53

But in America, if you don’t like the other side, you don’t negotiate with

24:59

them, you try to overthrow them,

25:04

preferably covertly. If it doesn’t work covertly, you do it overtly.

25:11

You always say, “It’s not our fault. They’re the aggressor. They’re the other side. They’re Hitler.” That comes up

25:18

every two or three years. Whether it’s Saddam Hussein, whether it’s Assad, whether it’s Putin, that’s very

25:25

convenient. That’s the only foreign policy explanation the American people are ever

25:32

given anywhere. Well, we’re facing Munich 1938. Well,

25:38

we’re facing Munich 1938. Can’t talk to the other side. They’re evil, implacable

25:44

foes. That’s the only model of foreign policy we ever hear from our mass media and the

25:53

mass media repeats it entirely because it’s completely suborned by the US

25:58

government. Now in 2014

26:04

the US worked actively to overthrow Yanukovich.

26:11

Everybody knows the phone call intercepted by my Columbia University colleague Victoria Nuland

26:19

and the US Ambassador Peter Pat. You don’t get better evidence. The

26:25

Russians intercepted her call and they put it on the internet. Listen to it. It’s fascinating. I know all these

26:33

people, by the way, by doing that they all got promoted in the Biden administration.

26:41

That’s the job. Now, when the Maidan occurred, I was called immediately. Oh,

26:49

Professor Saxs, the new Ukrainian prime minister would like to see you to talk

26:55

about the economic crisis because I’m pretty good at that.

27:01

And so I flew to Kiev and I was walked around the Maidan

27:07

and I was told how the US paid the money for all the people around the Maidan.

27:15

Spontaneous revolution of dignity.

27:20

Ladies and gentlemen, please. Where do all these media outlets come

27:25

from? Where does all this organization come from? Where do all these buses come

27:31

from? Where do all these people called in come from? Are you kidding? This is

27:36

organized effort and

27:43

it’s not a secret except to citizens of Europe and the

27:49

United States. Everyone else understands it quite clearly.

27:55

Then came Minsk and especially Minsk 2 which by the way

28:02

was modeled on South Turoleian autonomy and the Belgians could have related to

28:10

Mitzu very well. It said there should be autonomy for the Russianspeaking

28:17

regions in the east of Ukraine. It was supported unanimously by the UN

28:23

Security Council. The United States and Ukraine decided it was not to be

28:31

enforced. Germany and France, which were the guaranurs of the Normandy process,

28:39

let it go. And it was absolutely another direct

28:47

American unipolar action with Europe as usual playing completely

28:54

useless subsidiary role even though it was a guarantor of the agreement.

29:02

Trump one raised the armaments. There were many thousands of deaths in

29:09

the shelling by Ukraine in the Donbas. There was no Minsk 2 agreement.

29:16

And then Biden came into office. And again, I know all these people. I used

29:23

to be a member of the Democratic Party. I now am strictly sworn to be a member

29:30

of no party because both are the same anyway.

29:37

And because this is I the Democrats became complete wararm mongers over time

29:43

and there not was not one voice about peace just like most of your

29:50

parliamentarians the same way. So at the end of 1991,

30:00

Putin put on the table a last effort in two security agreement drafts. One with

30:08

Europe and one with the United States. The US put on the table December 15th n

30:14

uh 2021. I had an hour call with Jake Sullivan in

30:20

the White House begging, “Jake, avoid the war.

30:26

You can avoid the war. All you have to do is say NATO will not enlarge to

30:33

Ukraine.” And he said to me, “Oh, NATO’s not going to enlarge to Ukraine. Don’t worry about

30:40

it.” I said, “Jake, say it publicly.” No, no, no. We can’t say it publicly.

30:46

said, “Jake, you’re going to have a war over something that isn’t even going to

30:52

happen.” He said, “Don’t worry, Jeff. There will be no war.”

30:58

These are not very bright people. I’m telling you, if I can give you my

31:05

honest view, they’re not very bright people. And I’ve dealt with them for more than 40 years. They talk to

31:12

themselves. They don’t talk to anybody else. They play game theory. In

31:18

non-ooperative game theory, you don’t talk to the other side. You just make

31:23

your strategy. This is the essence of game theory.

31:31

It’s not negotiation theory. It’s not peacemaking theory.

31:36

It is unilateral non-ooperative theory. If you know formal game theory,

31:43

that’s what they play. It started at the Rand Corporation. That’s what they still play. In 2019, there’s a paper by Rand,

31:51

how do we extend Russia? Do you know they wrote a paper which Biden followed?

31:57

How do we annoy Russia? That’s literally the strategy. How do we

32:03

annoy Russia? We’re trying to provoke it, trying to make it break apart, maybe

32:08

have regime change, maybe have unrest, maybe have economic crisis.

32:14

That’s what you call your ally. Are you kidding?

32:23

So, I had a long and frustrating phone call with Sullivan.

32:30

I was standing out in the freezing cold. I happened to be h trying to have a ski

32:36

day and there I was. Jake, don’t have the war.

32:42

Oh, there’ll be no war. Jeff, we know a lot of what happened the next

32:48

month, which is that they refused to negotiate.

32:53

The stupidest idea of NATO is the so-called open door policy.

32:59

Are you kidding? NATO reserves the right to go where it wants without any

33:06

neighbor having any say whatsoever? Well, I tell the Mexicans and the

33:13

Canadians, don’t try it. You know, Trump may want to take over Canada. So,

33:20

Canada could say to China, why don’t you build a military base uh in uh in in

33:26

Ontario? I wouldn’t advise it. And the United States would not say,

33:33

well, it’s an open door. That’s their business. I mean, they can do what they want. That’s not our business.

33:40

But grown-ups in Europe, repeat this in Europe, in your commission, your high

33:49

representative. This is nonsense stuff. This is not even

33:54

baby geopolitics. This is just not thinking at all.

34:02

So the war started. What was Putin’s intention in the war?

34:07

I can tell you what his intention was. It was to force Zalinski to negotiate.

34:16

Neutrality. And that happened within 7 days of the

34:22

start of the invasion. You should understand this. Not the

34:28

propaganda that’s written about this. Oh, that they failed and he was going to take over Ukraine.

34:35

Come on, ladies and gentlemen, understand something basic.

34:40

The idea was to keep NATO, and what is NATO? It’s the United States,

34:47

off of Russia’s border. No more, no less.

34:53

I should add one very important point. Why

34:59

are they so interested? first because if China or Russia decided to have a

35:06

military base on the Rio Grand or in uh the Canadian border, not only would the

35:13

United States freak out, we’d have war within about 10 minutes,

35:18

but because the United States unilaterally abandoned the anti-bballistic missile treaty in 2002

35:26

and ended the nuclear arms control framework by doing So, and this is

35:32

extremely important to understand the nuclear arms control framework is

35:39

based on trying to block a first strike. The ABM treaty was a critical component

35:46

of that. The US unilaterally walked out of the ABM treaty in 2002.

35:52

It blew a Russian gasket. So everything I’ve been describing is in the context

35:57

of the destruction of the nuclear framework as well. And starting in 2010,

36:03

the US put in Aegis missile systems in Poland and then in Romania.

36:10

And Russia doesn’t like that. And one of the issues on the table in December and

36:16

January, December 2021, January 2022 was does the United States claim the right

36:23

to put missile systems in Ukraine? And Blinken told Lavrov in January 2022, the

36:31

United States reserves the right to put middle missile systems wherever it wants.

36:39

That’s your puditive ally. And now let’s put intermediate missile

36:46

systems back in Germany. The United States walked out of the INF treaty unilaterally in 2019. There is no

36:54

nuclear arms framework right now. None.

37:01

When Zalinski said in seven days, let’s negotiate.

37:07

I know the details of this exquisitly

37:12

because I’ve talked to all the parties in detail.

37:17

Within a couple of weeks, there was a document exchanged

37:23

that President Putin had approved that Lavrov had presented that was being

37:28

managed by the Turkish mediators. I flew to Anchora to listen in detail to

37:36

what the mediators were doing. Ukraine walked away unilaterally from a

37:43

near agreement. Why? Because the United States told them

37:50

to. Because the UK added icing to the cake by having Bojo

37:59

go in early April to Ukraine and explain and he has

38:06

recently and if your security is in the hands of Boris Johnson, God help us all.

38:13

Keith Starmer turns out to be even worse. It’s unimaginable but it is true.

38:23

Boris Johnson has explained and you can look it up

38:28

on the website that what’s at stake here is western hegemony,

38:35

not Ukraine, Western hegemony.

38:40

Michael and I met at the Vatican with a group in the spring of 2022 where we

38:47

wrote a document explaining nothing good can come out of this war

38:52

for Ukraine. Negotiate now because anything that takes time will mean

38:57

massive amounts of deaths, risk of nuclear escalation, and likely loss of

39:04

the war. I wouldn’t change one word from what we wrote then. Nothing was wrong in that

39:12

document. And since that document, since the US talked the negotiators away from

39:18

the table, about a million Ukrainians have died or

39:23

been severely wounded. And the American senators who are as

39:30

nasty and cynical and corrupt as imaginable say this is wonderful expenditure of our

39:37

money because no Americans are dying. It’s the pure proxy war. One of our

39:44

senators nearby me uh Blumenthal says this out loud.

39:51

Mitt Romney says this out loud. It’s best money America can spend. No

39:56

Americans are dying. It’s unreal.

40:02

Now, just to bring us up to yesterday,

40:08

this failed. This project failed. The idea of the project was that Russia

40:14

would fold its hand. The idea all along was Russia can’t

40:20

resist. As Ziggnub Brjinski explained in 1997,

40:26

the Americans thought we have the upper hand. We’re going to win because we’re going

40:32

to bluff them. They’re not really going to fight. They’re not really going to mobilize.

40:38

The nuclear option of cutting them out of Swift, that’s going to do them in. The economic

40:46

sanctions, that’s going to do them in. the Himars. That’s going to do them in.

40:53

The Attackums, the F-16s.

40:59

Honestly, I’ve listened to this for 70 years. I’ve listened to it as

41:05

semiunderstanding, I’d say, for uh about 56 years. They speak nonsense every day.

41:12

My country, my government, this is so familiar to me.

41:19

completely familiar. I begged the Ukrainians and I had a track record with the Ukrainians. I advised the

41:26

Ukrainians. I’m not anti- Ukrainian. I’m pro- Ukrainian completely. I said, “Save

41:31

your lives. Save your sovereignty. Save your territory. Be neutral. Don’t listen

41:37

to the Americans.” I repeated to them the famous adage of

41:42

Henry Kissinger that to be an enemy of the United States is dangerous but to be

41:48

a friend is fatal. Okay, so let me repeat that for Europe.

41:54

To be an enemy of the United States is dangerous, but to be a friend is fatal.

42:02

So let me now finalize a few words about Trump.

42:11

Trump does not want the losing hand.

42:16

This is why it is more likely than not this war will

42:22

end because Trump and President Putin will

42:27

agree to end the war. If Europe does all its great wararm

42:34

mongering, it doesn’t matter. The war is ending.

42:39

So get it out of your system. Please tell your colleagues

42:46

it’s over. And it’s over because Trump doesn’t want

42:52

to carry a loser. That’s it. It’s not some great morality.

42:59

He doesn’t want to carry a loser. This is a loser.

43:04

The one that will be saved by the negotiations taking place right now is Ukraine.

43:11

Second is Europe. Your stock markets rising in recent days, by the horrible

43:17

news of negotiations. I know this has been met with the sheer horror in these

43:23

chambers, but this is the best news that you could get.

43:30

Now, I encouraged, they don’t listen to me, but I tried to

43:36

reach out to some of the European leaders. Most don’t want to hear anything from me at all.

43:44

But I said, don’t go to Kiev.

43:49

Go to Moscow. Discuss with your counterparts.

43:54

Are you kidding? You’re Europe, your 450 million people, your 20 trillion dollar

44:01

economy. You should be the main economic trading

44:07

partner of Russia, its natural links.

44:12

By the way, if anyone would like to discuss how the US blew up Nordstream, I’d be happy to talk about that.

44:24

So the Trump administration is imperialist

44:30

at heart. It is a great powers

44:36

dominate the world. It is we will do what we want when we

44:42

can. We will be better than a scesscent

44:49

Biden and we’ll cut our losses where we have to.

44:55

There are several war zones in the world, the Middle East being another. We

45:00

don’t know what will happen with that. Again, if Europe had a proper policy,

45:06

you could stop that war. I’ll explain how.

45:11

But war with China is also a possibility.

45:17

So, I’m not saying that we’re at the new age of peace,

45:23

but we are in a uh very uh different kind of politics right

45:31

now. And Europe should have a foreign policy

45:36

and not just a foreign policy of rousophobia. a foreign policy that is a realistic

45:42

foreign policy that understands Russia’s situation, that understands Europe’s situation, that understands what America

45:50

is and what it stands for, that tries to

45:55

avoid Europe being invaded by the United States because it’s not impossible that America

46:03

will just land troops in Danish territory. I’m not joking.

46:10

And I don’t think they’re joking. And Europe needs a foreign policy, a real

46:16

one, not a yes, we’ll bargain with Mr.

46:21

Trump and meet him halfway. You know what that will be like? Give me

46:27

a call afterwards.

46:33

Please don’t have American officials as head of Europe. Have European officials,

46:41

please have a European foreign policy.

46:46

You’re going to be living with Russia for a long time, so please negotiate with Russia.

46:53

There are real security issues on the table. But the bombast and the rousophobia

47:02

is not serving your security at all. It’s not serving Ukraine security at

47:07

all. It contributed to a million casualties in Ukraine from this idiotic

47:14

American adventure that you signed on to and then became the lead cheerleaders of

47:21

solves nothing

47:26

on the Middle East. By the way, the US

47:32

completely handed over foreign policy to Netanyahu 30 years ago. The Israel lobby

47:39

dominates American politics. Just have no doubt about it. I could explain for

47:46

hours how it works. It’s very dangerous.

47:51

I’m hoping that Trump will not destroy his administration and worse the Palestinian people because

47:59

of Netanyahu, who I regard as a war criminal

48:05

uh properly indicted by the IC and that needs to be told no more that

48:14

there will be a state of Palestine on the borders of the 4th of June 1967.

48:20

according to international law as the only way for peace. It’s the only way

48:26

for Europe to have peace on your borders with the Middle East is the two-state

48:33

solution. There is only one obstacle to it, by the way, and that is the veto of

48:40

the United States and the UN Security Council. So if you want to have some influence, tell the United States, drop

48:48

the veto. You are together with 180 countries in

48:53

the world. The only ones that oppose a Palestinian state are

49:00

the United States, Israel, Micronisia, Nau, Pao,

49:08

Papa New Guinea, Mr. Malay

49:13

and Paraguay. So this is a place where Europe could

49:19

have a big influence. Europe has gone silent about the JCPOA

49:25

and Iran. Netanyahu’s greatest dream in life is a

49:30

war between the United States and Iran. He’s not given up. And it’s not impossible that that would come also.

49:39

And that’s because the US in this regard does not have an independent foreign

49:45

policy. It is run by Israel. It’s tragic.

49:50

It’s amazing. By the way, and it could end. Trump may say that he

49:58

wants foreign policy back. Maybe. I’m hoping that it’s the case. Finally, let

50:04

me just say with respect to China, China is not an enemy. China is just a success

50:11

story. That’s why it is viewed by the United States as an enemy because China

50:18

is a bigger economy than the United States.

50:23

That’s all. [Applause] [Music]