was up on that sort of the, as a russia times the us try to fix that. while i sold size, we will discuss what kind of a world we're looking at. now, without the columbus as a you, i'm a senior advisor and jeffrey black box is kelly. i can definitely be in the meanwhile, on the bottom is events he lives as popular as either his own full month's home general high ranking members of the cleaning medicaid phase 4 main describe as politically motivated the rest of the legal aid. so we got the massive wake up, proposed the cautiousness of the power to know who we are and we fight for our democracy and our freedom. and he's the most important value of the political

trenches and balance in romania has the e. u. member states leading presidential candidate is detained on disputing the charge the life on the international news center in laska. this is see welcome to the global news. all russia has disclosed some results of a recent meeting with us officials and assemble the forward massey supposedly maria is a how does that? says the 2 countries, all sinking ways to revive the biological ties with a focus on quote, overcoming evidence previous us administrations. so this is virginia, i'm go off and in accordance with the instructions of the foreign ministers, they discussed in detail ways of overcoming the numerous irritants inherited from previous us. administration's joint steps had been agreed to ensure the unimpeded

financing of the activities of russian and us diplomatic missions on a reciprocal basis and to create appropriate conditions for diplomats to fulfill their official duties. as folks between russia and the us of large, nissan did around normalizing by that full size, particularly regarding diplomatic missions. the agenda is said to have included efforts to secure a would set a russian diplomatic properties seized by the us between 20162018. moscow has also been able to offer a restoration of direct ad fibrex between the 2 countries which has been suspended since 2022. they lost the is being increasingly criticized for is hostility tools and brought up with that thing a reduction of realities on the ground. a renown economist, i'm you, i'm a senior advisor jeffrey sachs, express them raw the hoff remarks. so you have an official in bustles in america. if you don't like the other side,

you don't negotiate with them. you try to over throw them preferably covertly. if it doesn't work covertly you do it overly. you always say it's not our fault, they're the aggressor. they're the other side, they're a hitler, that comes up every 2 or 3 years. we've been experiencing this foreign policy for now. so essentially 33 years. europe has paid a heavy price for this because europe has not had any foreign policy during this period that i can figure out no voice, no unity, no clarity, no european interest, only american loyalty. i advise the ukrainians. i'm not anti ukrainian pro ukrainian completely. i said, save your lives,

saved your sovereignty. saved your territory, be neutral, don't listen to the americans. i repeat it to them. the famous adage of henry kissinger to be an enemy of the united states as dangerous, but to be a friend is fatal. please don't have american officials as head of europe, heavier, p, and officials. please heavy european foreign policy. that's why that's head over now to our special studio where our very own royce, the say, will be talking to a very special guest. said jeffrey sachs himself or a good often. and so i think times indeed over to you now 5 minutes of jeffrey sachs, but i thank you very much for that. in the you know, there is a shortage of voices of reason in the world. although there are some who are optimistic that we are witnessing perhaps to return to common sense. one of those loudest voices on the very front line is when the band you just heard is

a great privilege and a great on a to welcome in here onto the channel on oxy international columbia university professor economist public policy analyst with a hill in washington likes to call you a criminal in mouthpiece. hello jeffrey sachs. good to be with you. how are you? i'm very well, it is great to have you on the program. you know that speech, you just gave the other day of the, the, you call them and it was a bit of a school to speech. i've gotta tell you, i mean, you really sucked it to him that jeffrey. um, was it just a case of stone cold stats? what did you get any love from those in attendance as well, from those independent so things were fine. it's a, it's those that weren't in attendance, but i'm hoping i made some contact with europe. but as i emphasized the needs to have a european foreign policy, it needs to re engage with russia. it needs to have normal diplomacy. i, europe is his a region of 450000000 people in the union. a 20 trillion dollar economy,

a complimentary to the russian economy. they should be trading and mutually prosperous instead a, it's, everything's broken down and the, the, the hate talk is non stop. so that was the point that i was making get back to something that can possibly work. yeah for, for everybody. yeah. some kind of return to common sense. you know, we're hoping but that speech you gave jeffrey the upon your problem and it's sending ripples. it's a ripples around the world i've seen so many people reacting to this. and i just want to say on a personal level, i really admire that what you've been doing. you've been such a busy man these days on air online to the parliament. you didn't just give your scores to a speech of the e u parliament you've been drilling down on europe's foreign policy. of course, as trump and j. d volumes have taken out how to these traditional ties across the atlantic. what are your expectations going forward for europe? jeffrey can do you think it really can be independent of washington?

i think it can and should be, although i got an e mail just a few minutes ago by a very knowledgeable person, said you're dreaming. i, your, your will never be a unified i, you know, i don't think we should ever say never about the foreign policy and about what's possible. this is one of my understandings, partly from my own lifetime experience, partly from my reading of history, partly from the events of just the last few weeks. who would have thought that the united states and russia would be in a real rap for small which they are? well, i would have, by the way, because i kept saying during divide administration, you're making a terrible mistake. this is a complete blunder. there's no reason for this war. there is no reason for the breakdown of relations. and i think the guy, what donald trump is said as he came into office was he doesn't want to hold the

losing hand abide was right. right. so to my mind, things can change europe. oh, it, it got trapped by following the united states, getting a blind to kind of way. just trying to would be the great cheer leader of us, a gemini. obviously, the whole us approach, the unit polar approach was delusional. it's ended. now you're a pass to get it to act together. is it possible? it is not a way possible. it's this is, i even think it's going to happen because what else is you're going to do just be 20. 7 pickering divided the i countries in a world today were actual scale and cooperation means a tremendous amount for one's economy for one's politics. and one for one is geo politics and security. i think they'll get their act together meantime. and by the

way, i appreciate your optimism i do admire at jeffrey, but, you know, we've got this new administration back in the white house now. and you know, let's not forget that the us find on the might on cool of 2014. and so as you say, you know, your typical european laptops became the cheerleaders for what was then the us administration, but now the mazda has changed, and some of the saying that laptops don't know who to, why that tails for any more. meantime, it looks like trump is old, but done with you, craig, and he's looking for peace. he's looking to make a quick buck on the mineral resources as you are. looks pleased to try and continue with the will of jeffrey. can you just help me get my head around that please, to? well, it's hard to get one's head around because europe cannot continue the war ukraine. you cannot continue the war. i in the bottom line that what happened during the last 30 years i've been reported because this is a 30 year us project. is that the united states said were you in a polar,

we do what we want. we expand militarily, where we want, we expand our influence, where we want i, in 2008, the us said, now we move nato to ukraine to georgia. i and a, this is a replay by the way of the pride, me and war of 185-3218. 56, almost a, almost almost at the blueprint. and the breakfast said, no, i, that's not going to happen. i. the point is, europe got into line with it the us i strategy. so if i could call them added. so it's so if exaggeration in my view, but the us strategist said, will win because we're all powerful. what can boot do? what can russia do? nothing. and they thought up until the end, and i know what they thought, because i talked with them. i heard from them. i watched the what they were saying . they thought in 2021 that i read in the and the russia won't

resist. in 2022. well if russia does resist our push into ukraine, our sanctions will bring the russian autonomy to its knees. well up. the sanctions don't work, our high myers and our attack them, so we'll do so all with that doesn't work. russia well mobilized to continue the fight. in other words, this was a group in, in essence, playing a game i would say on the american side, which is so we can do what we want, right? that isn't the case. they, they lost that down, but the ukrainians, tragically followed that line i called the ukrainians. of course everyone knows kissinger's famous line that to be anatomy of america is dangerous to be a friend of america is fatal. i explain that to them. you're going to be like afghanistan. well,

here we are. yeah. they followed the us. europe followed the us. now they don't know quite what to do. yeah. but you know, it was the landscape coming to washington in this kind of pathetic way to sign over in almost a meaningless document, the mineral half the mineral rights. this is just sad, desperate, confused behavior. this is not strategy, this is not national policy. this is not continuing award, this is not, not big, it's banking business. does that mean? what was a racket, as we've all heard before, jeffrey, and i'm glad you pull that up by the way, because apparently in just a few hours from now. so lensky is gonna be going to be signing the so called sub soil agreement with, with the trump white house. but i was just gonna say, what reckless policy would you go back to the, by the administration or the previous test, or obama and so on. and so forth, what a reckless policy to pick a fight with the world's biggest nuclear power you called out. i mean, i con, you know what you said, how do we get our heads around this foreign policy that's being enacted over the past decade? and as you say, even 30 years now, you mentioned

a moment ago about expanding influence. we all, we all know united states and maybe we don't all know, but it's been meddling. and what 70 or 80 elections in the past century, it is the number one full most meddler when it comes to thinking gets teeth and sticking his fingers into other countries. democratic processes. meantime, we're essentially watching a washington dismantling the old god and real time usa i. d being the funded, it's co, but i'm used to over the road. governments around the world is being chopped off. jeffrey, i don't want to be uh, an irrational optimist here. but is it possible we're going to see a new era of, of america perhaps, respecting other countries and that political processes. it's possible this is far from a short believe me, it's far from the short american still behaved. so the with, with a lot of, into unity. i, frankly, even though this is shaped down and minerals, which i don't think will come to anything, by the way, i don't,

i don't think this is more than a piece of paper on adjuster on a photo op, but that means nothing. that's my own view. i may be wrong, but that's my own view that this is meaningless, but it still is a kinder shake down. that is absolutely strange. uh president trump, but he talks about canada 50 for state. he talks about panama talks about breeland . we're not at the end of the, we're kind of at the end of the publications. and so one by any means, but what i would say, and i mean is with the, the, the, the deepest seriousness, the major powers, the great powers, the united states, russia, china, india, if europe got attacked together, should stop putting their noses right up against the other side and stop the prob, occasions that could lead us to open war. this is the most important point going to

ukraine, was such a complication and blunder of the united states. similarly, be the way vu wes acts visa v, tie one is the same thing. that's, that if i could say, is the ukraine of the stage, you know, don't provoke between the nuclear super powers for heaven's sake. this is the most basic point for our survival. yeah. meantime, meantime we've seen essentially the g 7 economies almost entirely being swapped out by the bricks economies. when you look at the top 10 economies nowadays, you know, you mentioned china and india and russia, but some of the traditional european economies at the bottom now of the top 10 list . when you mentioned publications a moment ago, let's just bring it back to us. a idea for a 2nd. i mean this whole scandal that continues to shop the world. i mean, who would have thought jeffrey, honestly, who would have told us a id was financing all kinds of terror groups. like i spoke to her, i'll kind of h t as in syria, this is the country of the world. the tell us all of us. it's fighting terrorism,

jeffrey usa, i'd be, are very sadly combined a 2 completely different things. one was actually saving lives, actually fighting malaria, actually fighting tuberculosis, doing important things. and then it got it. of course, it was used as a tool of u. s. foreign policy. and not saving lives, not doing development, not doing you mandatory and things, but as a tool of us. and that if you lation and they put the tone statements together, which is so sad because we actually meet the 1st and the 2nd was disgusting, provocative, causing more. uh, you mentioned the, the, the interfere and say in elections i would say more generally do us interferes with parts democracy is non democracies. the u. s. foreign policy for the post war

period. and by that more, i mean world war 2 was that if you don't like the other side, you try to change the regime. most countries have a different foreign policy, which is if you don't like the other side, you negotiate with companies to try to bind to modus vivendi. but the united states was nu metal. you interfere you over throw you the stabilize you cause a cool. this has to stop. there had been dozens and dozens and dozens of these regime change operations and they, and very, very badly. yeah, indeed. well, i mean, you know, you look at this are russo phobic agenda and the agenda against russia. and of course, they've been trying to get rid of food in for such a long time, trying to foment discontent and using the, the propaganda of the western media to sell all these narratives. nobody's catchphrases. he's a dictate that he's this, he's that and yet do you know jeffery, on a personal level, i lived in america many, many years. i grew up in the u. k. i've been here in russia now nearly 20 years.

i've never experienced such a level of freedom in my i life. i spent a number of years working for a major american news network. i wouldn't, but mentioned that name is 3 letters, i wouldn't mention it, but there, i couldn't say certain things here in russia. i can actually say what needs to be set on you by the way, you should be here. what are the international on a problem? what advice is jeffrey? because you are brave enough to push back on these mainstream legacy media narratives. i guess, you know, some people say you're making friends everywhere. you go tongue in cheek, mr. sacks. well let, let me just say, since you are, you started a, your life or i guessing in britain i, i feel the united states. like, i'm sorry to say, i hope you won't take offense, but we learned everything we learn from britain and i and, and one of the fascinating points of our modern history is how it relates. as i said to the 19th century,

the crimean war was award led by britain to try to push russia out of the black sea region. this was the purpose of lord palmerston. he got to napoleon the 3rd to join him, and that was the outcome. but again, after the fall of the salvo stobel, a debt for about 17 years, i think it was i, russia's fleet was out of the black sea. that's what they're trying to do. again. yes. and one of the fascinating thing and it's, it's not going to work, but it is a, an echo of this 19th century. and one of the fascinating things with the roots of phobia is his british, russo phobia which he star carries till today to the white house. and where does that roots and phobia come from? there's a marvelous study from more than 50 years ago by a great historian who asked the question, where did british russo phobia arrives?

because after all, in the napoleonic wars, britain and russia were allies, that was it in 181-5518. 40 britain regarded russia as an enemy and this story and asked the question, why in 25 years did that change. and when he started, there was no reason for the change them other than russia was a big, powerful country. and britain resented that. as the british empire, britain simply resented russia. it concocted all sorts of tables that russia was going to would bade india through the khyber pass and all the rest. but this is the new west situation as well. both visa de russia, which i hope is now past, but also china, which is hate the other one simply for being big and successful. that's not a reason for russo phobia or sign up for be a. it's actually a reason for respect for dialogue for diplomacy, not for hatred,

but we get the hatred started up and it's not hard to store a paid for it. yeah, you know, there, there are some people who go back even further than 50 years, a go back to the great game is that like to coordinate going back of when over a 100 years. some people say and get queen victoria had been alive around the time of world war one world war one. she wouldn't have allowed it to happen because of the bloodlines between the role and office and the british role timely. they will all essentially relate at the end of the day is fascinating. you said to me that the person is still going for odessa, still going from the black sea. is that why london keeps talking about this 100 year contract with ukraine? yeah, it's interesting. i'm sorry to say, i don't mean to insult anybody, but the british position is on believably weird because brandon talks like it is the 19th century ruler of the world and the word pox for tanika and that they're gonna call the shots. it's all or please stop. come down to take,

take a break. we don't need this non stop more. we don't need to stand. we're flying around the world to say we continue the war, no matter what the united states does. he said in the white house, we'll put boots on the ground. come on on down, please. yeah, it's amazing. we don't need this. yeah. you don't need this. yeah. yeah, this guy kissed um and he will. he was dressed in the white house. he got no love from chum just now, and then of course, and not go macro. and he was there about 24 hours prior. he got no love from drum either. i was going to turn it to watch it just for the end attainment value, frankly. but i wanted to bring you bring you up to speed now that the latest totes, in his stumble, following the discussions and react between the russian and american officials. we are witnessing, as you said, moments ago, a reproach monkey. do you really think there's a chance that a true piece can be arranged between bruton and trump,

regardless all the noisy chihuahuas in your? well, 1st of all, a true peace can be arranged for a fundamental reason. there is no fundamental conflict between the united states and russia, so there is no fundamental reason for conflict. if the us had not asserted unit polarity after 1991, there would be no conflict if in december 19, 2021 is i beg to divide white house to negotiate with president pulling on the draft us russian security arrangement that to the table on december 15th 2021. negotiate there would be no war. there is no direct reason for conflict. there is reason for trade. there is reason. oh, they'll be competition and other things, but conflict, of course, not the same is true with europe. if europe would open its eyes,

it's hard with europe is 27 independent countries. they can't think clearly as a major power in a unified way. but if they could, they would have just a direct counterpart relationship with russia. and ukraine would be so much safer as the neutral state that it was that would have protected ukraine. because neutrality is not a danger. neutrality is a protection asked sweden, finland austria during the decades that it had neutrality, not the nato period of the last year. this is ridiculous, they were safe with him. traveler, the oscar is safe with neutrality, but they chose the block approach that's the unsafe mm. as anything commenter i that jeffrey told to me if you will, we've had these that we've had these negotiations up central, peaceful, toughening and assemble now 6 and

a half hours of talks jeffrey before that of course re add. well, what, what was interesting to me was, you know, um, who shackle, if you would, it will shut off. who was the presidential envoy of those who know he's an old friend of not him a food ends and he was down there with. so get off or off and re add and he had had a few pages of list so so called economic initiatives. and it almost gave the impression that off to these years of being the most sanction country in the world . the russo for big attitude, the trying to pummel the ruble. it almost seem like it's now time to get back to business. you want to start making some money again. let's do a joint ventures in the arctic. there's a whole list of economic initiatives. how do you read into that, jeffrey? well, i am an economist, so i believe in trade and investment in simple places that this is mutually beneficial as the or a beacon nomics is the idea that when you trade with other countries, it's mutual gain. it's not one wins and one loses. so this is the right approach.

it happens that western europe and russia are really complimentary economies and an important weight. they share some things. russia has a very sophisticated technological class. so leading engineers, leading mathematicians, but rush also has vast natural resources, vast territory, and so forth. and that's why the economic links between germany and russia are very strong at a natural level. and by the way, one of the projects of the united states was to make sure that germany and russia wouldn't get too close to each other economically. the u. s. heated the north stream pipeline in my view and blew it up. but in any event, it hated it, ended hated it, because that was the linking in germany and russia, by the way, the rhetoric we see that the us says is it made germany dependent on russia know,

it may germany benefit and russia benefit that's called mutual benefit that's what trade does. that's not dependency. that's crazy. yeah. and that that should be re established. yeah, i mean, you think about it. and as you well know, jeffrey, you know, as being cheap russian energy but for so many decades as, as created the, the energy backbone of europe. they created the industrial backbone with germany, of course. so the cheap russian energy it's, it's, it's now gone. there are hoops, perhaps no stream could be turned back on, but when you talk about the, the sabotage of north stream and, you know, and clearly, i mean, obviously is going on with paying, you know, the us intelligence services where that guy is involved in this. but, but i just, um, who's throwing who on the bus? the north stream wasn't just a russian pipeline is a multi european russian consortium. a lot of european countries and companies involve that by destroying the north stream. it almost seems like america was throwing europe under the bus. you know, i, i think that it,

it was part of the americas, you know, polar strategy. i, that gun are also part of its commercials driving cheap. let's add because the american liquefied natural gas company scrambled to sell l. n g to west through europe in a roughly 6 times the price that europe was paying for. russia's low cost, a pipeline, a gas. so there were some commercial interest, but there was a long standing opposition in the united states to nord stream. partly because there was a long standing view that russia and germany should not get too close to each other in a, in an american flag world. but more fundamentally, in the american led world, the main target was not europe, the main target was russia. and i, and a, this was stated repeatedly that the us goal was to surround russia with

nato. the us goal was to make sure that russia was the 2nd rate or 3rd rate power it all invidious. we had a remarkable rand corporation paper in 2019, which i find one of the most disgusting works. a coming out of a, out of the us, official them. that said, you know, basically how do we extend rush, how do we annoy russia? how do we undermine russia? that's a, a national goal. how about, how do we cooperate with russian? how do we make peace with rush? how do we find security arrangements if, if rand was working on that, it would be good. yeah. but that paper 2019 is literally a list of ways to annoy aggravate and weak and russia. that's yeah, hassles for us. problem so yeah i'm, i'm sorry to say and these are supposed to be the adults in the room. you know it's, it's just astonishing and it's just be so depressing watching this for too many years. now jeffrey, just quickly that there was

a link for pull published in the west of mastery media suggesting that trump, when it comes to talking to russia, trump might be willing to pull american troops out of nato basic as an eastern europe. did you hear about that? did you read it? your thoughts on it? well, i, i read it, i, i think what is key is that europe really needs a security arrangement. and it was heading towards one with the organization of security and cooperation in europe with o. s. c, e o. s. c is very different from nato. a nato is your security comes through the us military alliance. o. s. c, e is your security, comes through collective security that we can't be safe if the other side is on unsafe. so let's work together on assurances on e mail it to or is ation on a neutral spaces on other way.