Dehai News

https://ericzuesse.substack.com/p/36-minutes-in-which-you-can-understand

https://theduran.com/36-minutes-in-which-you-can-understand-how-why

36 Minutes in Which You Can Understand How & Why ALL of the Post-1990 Wars Came About

11 March 2025, by Eric Zuesse. (All of my recent articles can be seen here.)

This is truly extraordinary. On March 11th, Jeffrey Sachs — who since at least 1990 has been the world’s best-informed person about international relations because he is and has been the go-to guy that virtually every head-of-state of every major and even many minor world powers has called in for advice on major world problems, including international negotiations — gave a 36-minute summary of his historic and historical 93-minute presentation on February 19th at the EU. A decades-long high official at the U.N., who has dealt with him for decades, introduced him by saying of him, “I've never met any person who is so well connected internationally, as Jeff”. In this 36-minutes, he summed-up world-history since the Soviet Union started breaking up in 1990, and documented how and why all of the wars since 1990 actually came about — basically due to the outright evilness of the U.S. Government since 1945 — he saw and heard and participated in these events with his own eyes and ears, and is now finally going public with all of it. Perhaps never in history has there been a more brilliant “fly on the wall,” at the making — the decisions that produced — so much important history, all over the world, throughout decades. So, his testimony here is very special.

On 19 February 2025, he had delivered to the EU a lengthier such account (93 minutes), which I wrote about here and here, but his March 11th summary has actually added some important new details, and it is all here. Also commenting, this time, along with him, is yet another pure genius, Alexander Mercouris, who is quite possibly the world’s top public analyst of geopolitics — a man who, like Sachs, has a virtually photographic memory married to an extraordinary gift of logical analysis of all of it, so as to be able to bring to bear not only an encyclopedic knowledge but knowledge that’s in depth on an astoundingly large number of topics. 

Here is the presentation (interspersed on occasion, by my own views, wherever I am not in complete agreement with his viewpoint — so as to invite further discussion of those matters), and I also provide a few links to things that are mentioned in or relevant to the video, so as to make easier for the reader to access relevant sources:

“Geopolitics, peace and chaos w/ Jeffrey Sachs (Live)”

 

3:05

SACHS: My main point [when I addressed the EU] was uh

3:10

that uh the United States uh basically

3:16

just seriously messed up from the late 1980s until until the last few weeks

3:24

actually, uh because uh and I saw it with my own eyes, I was uh an economic advisor

3:31

to Gorbachov's economic team in 1990 1991, I was an adviser to president Yeltsin's

3:38

economic team in 1991 to 1993, I was an economic advisor to

3:45

president Kuchma of Ukraine in 1993 94, I've seen it from both sides, I've been

3:52

called in by Ukraine since then on on occasions as after the Maidan [2013-2014 movement to overthrow Ukraine’s democratically elected President] the

3:58

government asked me to come in, so I, I learned a bit of awful stuff about the Maidan as well by

4:06

personal, uh, sight, of what was going on. The upshot of all of this was that

4:13

Gorbachev and yeltsin and the world at that time, the the Soviet world then the

4:19

Russian uh Federation, said let's end the Cold War,

4:25

let's have peace, and the United States could not think in that term. The United

4:32

States said, oh, we get it, we won, you lost, we do what we want, it's now the unipolar

4:39

world, and I think the Soviets and the Russians said uh no, that's not exactly

4:45

what we mean. Why don't we have peace and cooperation? And the United States said yeah, we get it, we win, you lose, we do

4:53

what we want. This is the essence of the 30 years from

4:58

1990 onward, the United States decided: Well we have all the power, we can be a

5:04

bully, we can do what we want, we can uh uh go back on any commitments made, we

5:11

can overthrow governments, uh we can uh back out of the nuclear arms framework,

5:18

whatever we want, we are America. So, that's my summary in in in

5:25

very simple terms, in particular starting in uh

5:33

1990 February 7th 1990 the United States and Germany in

5:39

the context of German reunification told the Soviet leadership

5:44

and Mikhail Gorbachev to his face in absolutely explicit terms, that our

5:51

governments have lied about ever since, [that] NATO will not move one inch eastward [toward Russia] in

5:59

the context of the Soviet Union ending the Warsaw Pact military Alliance [set up in 1955 to counter America’s NATO, which had started in 1949] and

6:06

in the context of German reunification there was a basic deal, Germany will

6:12

reunify because that was a legal agreement that needed to be reached to end World War II. Actually in 1990 World

6:21

War II was not ended by a treaty, it was ended by the 4 plus two process in 1990

6:28

to reunify Germany, one of the reasons for the Cold War in fact was that there

6:34

was no treaty after World War II because the Western Alliance didn't want a

6:41

treaty [with the Soviet Union], the Soviet Union said let's have a neutral demilitarized Germany. Uh, The

6:47

West said no, we will remilitarize Germany, we will create NATO, we will create the Federal Republic of Germany

6:54

without a treaty. The Soviet Union said but our security, the West said at that time back in the 1940s [starting on 25 July 1945] not YOUR security,

7:02

it's our NATO, okay? Well, there was no end to World War II until 1990 from a

7:09

diplomatic and juridical point of view, and in that context the commitment was NATO will not move one inch eastward. The

7:18

Soviet Union ended in 1991, as we know, in December. I was almost in the room when

7:25

that happened, because uh I was literally sitting in front of Boris Yeltsin. I don't

7:31

know if we've talked about this before, but uh in December 1991 I led an

7:36

economic delegation to speak with President Yeltsin, he came from the back

7:41

of a room in the in the Kremlin, sat down directly in front of me because I was leading the delegation, and he said

7:49

Gentlemen, I can announce the Soviet Union is over. So, I heard it with my own

7:56

ears to my face that moment, oh, I assured

8:01

him, The West will be overjoyed and give him all the financial help for stabilization and so forth. That's what I

8:09

thought — rather naive, of course. The United States did not lift a finger to

8:17

help uh this new democratization this transformation this

8:23

historic moment, because, well, President yeltsin was trying to grapple with the

8:29

economic crisis, the United States was saying we won, you lost, we do what we

8:35

want, and there was absolutely no sense in Washington that this was an

8:42

opportunity for sustained peace other than the unipolar US World [and so U.S. armaments manufacturers’ corporate stocks took off like a rocket and have continued that soaring to the present day, and a study published in 2022 by Bernstein Research found (as reported on its page 75) that, for one typical ‘defense’ corporation, Northrop Grumman, its “stock has outperformed the S&P 500 by 451% over the last 10 years.” Furthermore,  “Defense stocks … also tend to outperform through recessions and are uncorrelated with inflation.” That’s the type of extraordinary profitability that a corporation which controls its own market normally achieves; and, in the U.S., ‘defense’ stocks started taking off like a rocket in 1991 and have been continuing that astounding growth ever since. The less necessary that a capitalist nation’s military is for protecting the nation, like in the U.S. since 1991 when the Soviet Union ended, the more profitable its military manufacturers are, because the corruption then becomes virtually unlimited (see this and this for the evidence). Right now, the U.S. Government spends 65% — almost two-thirds — of the entire world’s military expenditures — almost twice what all of the world’s 200 other nations together spend. Now, THAT’S corruption, on a massive scale! It’s shown right there, in those numbers.] so the story

8:49

I said in the European Parliament was, uh, immediately, the U.S. plan to break its

8:55

promise not to expand NATO. Bill Clinton who followed George Bush Senior uh in

9:03

1994 made the decision [no, it had been made secretly by President GHW Bush on 24 February 1990], and it was a decision we learned from the historians [was for NATO]

9:09

to go all the way to Ukraine. Already then the idea was: NATO, we go as far as

9:15

we want. And we know that the U.S. Deep state had the vision from then onward

9:22

that just like the Soviet Union fell apart we will help Russia to fall apart,

9:28

Russia can disintegrate into its ethnic nations. [The rabidly anti-Russian Polish aristocrat Zbigniew] Brzezinsky in 1997 talked about

9:35

Russia becoming a a confederation of three uh loosely connected parts, a

9:42

European part, a Siberian part, and an East Asian part. The grandiosity of the Western Vision had no

9:50

limits. This was, after all, ‘the end of history’ as we were told, and the end of

9:56

history was American hegemony. Well it did not go well, the Europeans by

10:03

the way knew something's off with this, they didn't just quietly go along. We

10:11

should remember that as late as 2003 we had the European politicians saying no

10:20

to the war in Iraq, which was a a a war

10:25

on absolutely uh fake premises, it was a war that Bibi Netanyahu uh talked the U.S.

10:33

into doing on behalf of Israel. [Sachs is saying that Israel — NOT the U.S. — actually runs the U.S. empire.] This is what that war was about [I would ask him to PROVE this], and uh the

10:39

Europeans uh they didn't support it, the Germans opposed it, the uh the French

10:46

opposed it, uh of course the British went along, sorry to say they always go along

10:51

partly because they always go along and partly because Britain never saw a war it didn't like, this is part of the the the

10:59

British Imperial nostalgia [I have a different theory.] but the Europe — Continental —Europeans opposed the

11:04

Iraq War, but that was basically the last time they opposed the United States, and

11:11

in this grandiosity of the United States, uh, this expansion of NATO which came in

11:18

waves, first Hungary Poland Czech Republic, second wave in

11:23

2004 was the the Baltic states Latvia Lithuania Estonia, Balkan States Bulgaria

11:31

and Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia Central Europe. And and the Balkans uh

11:39

that's when President Putin said stop already, you lied to us, you cheated but

11:45

do not come closer. And of course these uh maniac neocons, uh listen to President

11:54

Putin, said oh he doesn't want us to come closer, so we must continue the

11:59

American thinking. 2008 was The Showdown in uh Bucharest at the NATO Summit. That

12:06

was the last moment that Europe had a foreign policy, uh in the first day of

12:12

the NATO Summit Merkel uh and Sarkosi

12:17

opposed uh the call by George Bush Jr to

12:23

announce a plan for NATO enlargement to Ukraine and to Georgia. The next day they

12:29

folded their hands by agreeing that NATO would announce albeit without a timeline

12:36

and a plan, that Ukraine would become a NATO member. To my mind, that was the last

12:43

moment there was a European foreign policy. After that moment, everything was

12:48

in lock step with the U.S. neocons [He is attributing neoconservatism to Israel, thoough it started actually in 1877.] and a whole generation of European politicians

12:55

rose up cultivated by US money, cultivated by uh the the military

13:02

industrial complex uh network of so-called think tanks, which are the

13:07

opposite of think tanks, they are the No Think Tank — please do not have any

13:12

independent thinking, the Atlantic Council the German Marshall fund all of these places basically became neocon [They became neocon from Truman, who created Israel.], uh

13:22

uh breeding grounds for Europe's political class, and we didn't hear a

13:28

peep, interestingly. You know, I catch glimpses of all of this, I'm an economist, I'm not

13:34

in the security world, but European leaders tell me things because I speak at, you know, to the top leadership,

13:40

usually about economic matters, but after Bucharest [Summit in 2008], one of the European leaders

13:46

said to me I can't believe what your president did, you know, so reckless, we know how dangerous this is, but not a

13:53

peep in public. This is the great lie to the European people.

13:59

In private, they say this was terrible; in public yes, we follow the U.S. line yes,

14:06

NATO will enlarge, and of course we know the sequence of events after that. The U.S. uh

14:14

uh paid for much of most of perhaps uh the

14:20

Maidan Insurrection, the violent coup, the U.S. was deeply involved in the overthrow

14:26

of Viktor Yanukovich. I'm sure we'll learn a lot more about that in the years

14:32

ahead. [Actually, it’s already virtually completely known.] I happened to catch a glimpse of that also by someone explaining to me

14:38

after the Maidan but on the Maidan while people were still milling around, because I was called in to meet with the new

14:44

government, and I I went because I went as a courtesy because I had beforehand —

14:50

and somebody explained to me how much money the Americans put into the Maidan

14:56

Insurrection [NO — it was Obama’s COUP, and also see this.] really unpleasant stuff stuff I couldn't stand it it just it it

15:02

was God awful to think about yet another us regime change operation one more

15:09

thing to add to the mix that I emphasized in the European Parliament, not only did the US expand NATO not only

15:18

did it engage in multiple wars of choice [AGGRESSIONS, with subterguges, sanctions, coups, and invasions] many of them by the way on behalf of Bibi

15:25

Netanyahu and Israel and Israel's what I regard as absolutely extremist agenda [of Zionism, which is Jewish nazism], but

15:33

the U.S. did one other thing, that was at least as consequential, probably much

15:40

more consequential and underemphasized, and that is that in 2002

15:46

the U.S. unilaterally abandoned the anti-ballistic missile treaty, which was

15:52

a complete foundational bulwark of nuclear arms control because the

16:00

anti-ballistic missile treaty was part of a framework

16:05

to prevent one side or another from attempting or achieving a first strike

16:12

capability on the other, a decapitation strike, the idea is if you don't have

16:17

anti-ballistic missiles or if you have just a few of them then if you attack,

16:22

the other side will be able to uh counter attack, uh, and you won't have the

16:28

anti ballistic missiles to protect your side; so, thereby, there will be nuclear

16:34

deterrence, but in 2002 the United States abandoned the basic concept of nuclear

16:41

deterrence and said no, we do what we want, we put anti-ballistic missiles

16:48

where we want, starting in Poland, then in Romania, and then absolutely

16:55

consequentially telling the Russians, yeah, even in Ukraine [with the closest border to The Kremlin] if we want which

17:01

is apparently what Antony Blinken told foreign minister Lavrov in January

17:10

2022 according to the uh former CIA analyst and wonderful person and analyst

17:17

Ray McGovern, so three fundamental aspects of U.S. foreign policy — expand NATO,

17:27

forever surround Russia in the Black Sea region, keep the U.S. military expanding —

17:34

number one regime change operations and wars of choice, number two and three

17:42

abandon the nuclear arms control framework. That's the basis of why we

17:49

ended up in this disaster in Ukraine, that's what I told the European

17:55

Parliament. Of course, they don't hear a word of this in the mainstream media.

18:02

This is all documented, known to historians, known to people who have been involved in this, known to me as an

18:10

economist who has been involved in this region for more than 30 years because it's right there to look at if someone

18:18

would look at it. And my main message to the European parliamentarians is for God's sake get a foreign policy. Learn

18:26

the history, understand how you've been walked into this disaster. Well, I told

18:32

them all of that, here comes president Trump, says we'll end the disaster, thank

18:38

you. This is this 30-year neocon failure. I think for Trump the main thing

18:45

is it's a failure. Ukraine's getting destroyed, uh you know one of the uh by

18:51

the way just a as as a quick digression I think one of the clever but true

18:57

things that is a is a common quip is that the Russians play chess and the Americans play poker

19:04

uh and I think that this is basically right, uh, the Russians are looking at at

19:09

the long term, the Americans are bluffing, the Americans are are playing a hand [of cards] and

19:15

the neocons were a mix of delusion and bluff uh but there was a lot of bluff in

19:22

it, there was the idea Russia can't do anything, we're so good we're so powerful

19:28

they're going to fold, they're going to fold at every step. The idea was they're going to fold we're going to warn them

19:35

no SWIFT banking system, we're going to warn them HIMARS we're going to warn them ATACMS, they're going to fold

19:42

their hand. Americans, it's filled with idiocy I'm telling you, it's something to

19:48

something to behold. So, that that's the story I told them. It's it's it's a

19:54

correct rendering of history, it's extraordinary,

19:59

and the perversity of all of this is that now there's an exit ramp now. Europe

20:06

could get its act together, but to this moment it refuses to do

20:11

so. MERCOURIS: Just just a few quick points: firstly um the most important thing to

20:17

take away from your speech for me is that this crisis that we have in international relations is the product

20:25

of purposeful intentional foreign policy in other words of positive choices. I

20:32

mean there's going to be people who say that we drifted into this, we made all kinds of mistakes, we acted in good faith,

20:38

we got drawn into a quagmire; and nothing of the sort — we actually, and I say we because we Europeans are accessories in

20:45

it — we actually made positive decisions that have directly led to this. In that

20:50

respect, I have to say I think your speech, Professor Sachs, to the European

20:55

Parliament, it reminds me of the Pentagon papers again. The Pentagon papers showed

21:03

the stages in which the United States made a series of decisions, purposeful decisions that led to the crisis in

21:10

Vietnam, the crisis in Southeast Asia, this on an even bigger scale

21:16

LED, again was every bit as purposeful, and well you were a witness

21:23

to these events, a direct witness, you were with Yeltsin, you spoke to these European leaders; you talk to players,

21:32

decision makers like Jake Sullivan. I'd like to get on to that in a moment, so, you know, there is enormous weight and

21:39

authority in what you say. You also describe what you saw in Kiev directly

21:45

after uh uh Maidan, what people said to you. The most extraordinary thing

21:51

people on the eve of the events in South Sudan would, you know, you saw things

21:56

there, which were extraordinary things, the presence of the Americans there, and American senators and CIA agents and all

22:04

the usual Spooks and all of those people, uh, there; so, um, this is an authoritative

22:12

statement of policy of what was going on. And we also have, you know, this curtain

22:19

lifting, sometimes under those debates, and one of them was that debate that you mentioned in our previous program we did

22:26

with you the one in this uh National Security Council rejecting your very

22:33

affordable uh uh uh plan to stabilize the financial system in Russia, which by

22:39

the way I remember at the time and the amounts of money was small I mean relative to what we've been spending I

22:46

mean they're infinitely small. It would not have cost a lot at all

22:52

SACHS: Just to say about that, you know as we talked about it when I read the minutes of this National Security

22:59

Council meeting June 3rd 1991, I was stunned at how idiotic these

23:08

Americans were, but I can tell you, the worst of them, the very worst, was a

23:13

colleague of mine at the Kennedy School of government a man named Richard Darman

23:18

who was at the time the head of the Office of Management and Budget [“OMB] and when

23:23

people read this stuff, which they will read, Darman talks about, well, we have to

23:29

do a PR stunt, we have to do PR uh to show that we care, but we're going to do

23:35

the minimal possible [to assist Russia], and then he and another economist named Michael Boskin at

23:41

Stanford are the two ring leaders to say the reforms are impossible they're just impossible we're not gonna, we're not

23:48

going to do anything, we have to be Machiavellian in this, we have to do the least possible, Gorbachev's a showman. You

23:54

know, you look at this stuff and and you cry, because it's so ignorant and and and

24:02

also how can a government work at a pivotal moment like this? they should have given me a phone call, for God's

24:08

sake, talk about it, they should have talked to Grigory Yavlinsky who was the still leading politician in Russia and

24:16

was the advisor of Gorbachev. They didn't even lift a finger [to actually assist Russia’s transition to capitalism] they just ‘knew’ (that in economics, all games must be win-lose — no win-win, but only deceit to pretend so] and

24:23

that's the American arrogance, they just know the truth, they don't have to talk to anybody, don't have to study anything,

24:29

they don't have to listen to the other side, they just know, and that's what comes out of this; and in terms of cost

24:36

by the way, I'll tell you one more story in November uh

24:42

1991, after the putsch that had taken Gorbachev down, but a month before the

24:49

end of the Soviet Union formally, Yeltsin was already the dominant political

24:54

figure, Soviet Union was on its way of ending, and Yeltsin was the leader at the time, Gorbachev was already uh basically

25:02

in the shadows and on his way out, and Yeltsin's economic advisor who became an

25:09

acting prime minister after that, Yegor Gaidar, asked me to come to Moscow to talk

25:16

to him and his team about the urgent economic situation, so I went to the data

25:23

outside of Moscow, and I talked with them and in November of

25:29

1991 the Soviet Union had debts falling due and they were running out of

25:35

reserves, this was a a financial crisis, this was also a revolution but it was a

25:41

financial crisis, a very acute financial crisis, so I've been involved in lots of

25:47

financial crises, on how to end them, and I've successfully helped to end several and I said the most standard thing in

25:54

the cookbook, the first thing you learn about this, is a standstill on debt

26:00

repayments pending a stabilization program. So, the so-called G7 deputies

26:07

were on their way, that's the Finance Minister deputies, uh led by the United States of course, and I said to Gaidar, uh

26:15

okay ask them for a debt standstill, uh, and I waited in the outside room as he

26:21

went in and met the G7 deputies in November 1991, and he came out an hour

26:26

later ashen faced, and I said Yegor, what what happened, and he said they told me if we don't pay

26:34

every penny on time they will stop the food shipments that are on the high seas

26:40

right now — they threatened the Soviet Union, they threaten the Russians, you must spend down every penny of your

26:47

foreign exchange reserves. This is madness in the in the context of the end

26:54

of the Cold War, trying to make peace, democratization; the United States is demanding something they wouldn't even

27:00

demand in normal times, that every penny must be paid at at every moment.

27:07

So, the stupidity is a big part of it, but it's the deliberateness of it that is,

27:15

like you say, shocking. This is not accident; this is this is a combination

27:20

of arrogance and stupidity MERCOURIS: and cynicism. I mean, when people start quoting or

27:26

bragging that they're going to be Machiavelian. I mean that what is that, if not an

27:32

admission of cynicism and the same about the conversation you had with Jake Sulllivan — Ukraine will never join NATO

27:39

but we can't say that in public. We're going to, I, it is SACHS: By the way, I

27:45

remember, I remember I, I, was standing outside, and I was skiing that day, I'm standing

27:51

out in the free, in the freezing cold, on my, on my mobile, and I said, Jake we're

27:56

going to have a war over something that isn't actually going to happen, and

28:01

you're not going to say it, and he said Jeff, don't worry, don't worry, there's going to be diplomacy, there's going to

28:07

be no war. Of course, that's the man who said two weeks before October 7th 2023

28:15

that the Middle East is the most quiet and stable that it's been for two decades — that's our political leadership.

28:23

For God's sake, and just, he couldn't predict a war in, in in a month, and he couldn't

28:30

understand what was happening in the Middle East, and he's our National Security Advisor. MERCOURIS: Absolutely, uh, just

28:36

to finish, go and read that speech, this is my advice to everybody who's watching this program: read that speech through, uh

28:43

try and get the whole text because there are uh uh um you know condensed versions listen to it [its complete video is ALSO there withthe entire transcript], because it is, as I said, it

28:50

sets it all out, it does so very clearly, and it shows, as said, it’s, uh, intentional

28:56

all the way, and it has led us to catastrophe; and, just to say on that

29:01

promise not to extend NATO eastwards, I have memory, I remember watching Hans

29:08

Dietrich Genscher going on British television be interviewed about this, saying not an

29:15

inch east, I remember reading articles in all the newspapers that now deny that promise was ever made, the Guardian the

29:22

Times the Financial Times, they're all talking about it at the time as I said I

29:28

remember it, I I I mean it is it's always astonished me, that people pretend that

29:34

promise was never given, whether the people who gave that promise were acting

29:40

in good faith — that I don't know — but that the promise was made, of that there is no

29:46

doubt at all. As said, I leave the last word to you Jeffrey obviously. SACHS: uh uh just as we have, you know a a time point to

29:55

finish, you know, the — probably the best book on American

30:00

foreign policy uh in maybe maybe half century plus was

30:07

a book by then Senate chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee in the

30:13

United States Jay William Fulbright in uh the mid 1960s called The Arrogance of

30:20

Power, [It’s his 1967 condemnation of neoconservatism.] and he used that title to explain the Vietnam War and that arrogance did

30:27

not and, and that is really the point in fact it, it went into hyperdrive with the

30:34

end of the uh Cold War, so-called end of the Cold War let's say with the end of

30:40

the Soviet Union, the United States could not understand peace and mutual

30:46

respect. To tell you the truth, I don't know whether we are at at the end of

30:51

that hyper arrogance or not. [America certainly is not at the end of it, because no one publicly speaks the core fact about this — that neoconservatism is evil, and that our Government is and remains that: evil ever since 25 July 1945, and must renounce the U.S. Government ever since that time (and only THEN will our Government terminate its cursedness).] I think we're at the end of the the war in Ukraine, I'm convinced of it, I think

30:59

president Trump has this right, and there's a lot of Deep State forces

31:05

telling him no no no no no, go back, uh, you’ve got to put on sanctions, you have to

31:10

uh recharge Ukraine, and so forth, but I think he understands this is a completely losing hand, and I think the Europeans as

31:19

uh foolish and idiotic as as they are in their rhetoric right now, can't do

31:25

anything about it, so the war will end — it could end on the basis of the Istanbul

31:32

draft agreement April 15 2022, another of

31:37

these profound missed opportunities, because we could have had a million Ukrainian

31:44

lives saved people who are dead now or gravely wounded — none of it needed to

31:50

happen, because even a month after the special military operation started, there was a draft agreement to end it, and the

31:58

United States and UK of course famously said no in their arrogance, in their poker playing — well, we'll raise the

32:05

stakes, we'll bluff Russia, they'll never mobilize, they'll fold when they see the economic sanctions and so forth, and

32:12

that's probably a million or more casualties of Ukrainians since that

32:19

moment. We have other conflicts, I hope we can talk about them soon, the Middle East

32:25

scares the wits out of me because Israel has controlled U.S. foreign policy for

32:30

decades, uh, I don't know whether that's over, I I I want Donald Trump to have a

32:36

an America foreign policy, not an Israel-made foreign policy. If he does [the patriotic thing], that war

32:43

could end immediately, also because that's also a war of choice: do you back

32:48

Israeli extremism, which the United States has done for 30 years in its

32:53

arrogance and its foolishness and its recklessness, or do you have peace in the Middle East? [Israel is a Jewish-nazi state and needs therefore to terminate — it will ALWAYS be at war.] So, for me the big question

33:01

is, you know, are we done with this phase of war-making relentlessly in history,

33:09

one war is going to end soon Ukraine, uh the Middle East it's it's big stakes and

33:15

what will happen with the U.S. and China? Again, there are a lot of arrogant

33:21

thinkers who could lead the U.S. and the world into complete disaster unless they

33:26

learn some diplomacy. Final note: I'm hoping that Europe wakes

33:31

up — it will, it has to, it's so unreal right now, when you're delusional like a

33:38

cartoon character that's kind of run off the roof but you're hanging in the air before you look down and you realize

33:45

there's nothing below. They're going to realize oh my God — we,

33:50

we just gave away our foreign policy for decades, and we need to get

33:57

back to sanity. We haven't heard a word of it yet in Europe, by the way. What we

34:02

heard from Macron was the opposite of sane, marching uh off to war or flying

34:09

off to war, uh from Starmer completely nuts, but people are out on the streets

34:15

now in Paris, and elsewhere, and in Bucharest they don't want this anymore

34:21

and even though they're being forced into this, these leaders are so unpopular

34:27

and the public knows so much better that there will be a change in Europe too. MERCOURIS: I I

34:33

believe I completely agree. Professor Sachs, we're definitely going to have you back, we're going to talk about the Middle East, we're going to talk about

34:39

some of the proposals, some of the ideas you have, about how to um arrange the peace in Ukraine, which are very

34:45

interesting and involve the United Nations. We might ask you perhaps to bring Mr Schulenburg to discuss those,

34:52

because he knows so much about that too that might be an idea, just just the thought, but we

34:58

understand that you have to do, uh, finish now. I want to thank you again and say

35:03

that speech to the European Parliament, completely not reported in the

35:08

mainstream media here in London by the way just to say, but all over the Internet everybody's talking about it

35:14

across the internet and um it will be a historic document — of that I have absolutely no doubt at all, when people

35:21

want to understand what has been happening not just over the last few years but over the 30 years that led up

35:28

to it, they will go to that speech. So, thank you professor Sachs, and speak to

35:34

you soon. SACHS: and again, great to be with you guys, and thanks so much thanks for the fantastic work you guys do every

35:40

single day. It's absolutely vital, and you've been so right every day.

35:46

PS: If you like this article, please email it to all your friends or otherwise let others know about it. None of the U.S.-and-allied ‘news’-media will likely publish it (nor link to it, since doing that might also hurt them with Google or etc.). I am not asking for money, but I am asking my readers to spread my articles far and wide, because I specialize in documenting what the Deep State is constantly hiding — what the ‘news’-media ignore if they can, and deny if they must. This is, in fact, today’s samizdat.

—————

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse’s latest book, AMERICA’S EMPIRE OF EVIL: Hitler’s Posthumous Victory, and Why the Social Sciences Need to Change, is about how America took over the world after World War II in order to enslave it to U.S.-and-allied billionaires. Their cartels extract the world’s wealth by control of not only their ‘news’ media but the social ‘sciences’ — duping the public.