There are many details in the interview that require a lot of knowledge. You can look them up, but even without that, everyone can understand the important basic lines. In order to be able to act together in time to build a peaceful and humane world for all, it is helpful to develop a common basic understanding. Prof Sachs is US-American and advocates overcoming the US empire by building a world of equal rights. He thinks, feels and acts as a global citizen or member of the One Human Family (as far as I can tell). He shows us how important it is not to generalise, not to lump all Americans together because of their nationality or all people of a different skin colour or religion. There are people in all parts of our human family who stand up for equal rights for all of us. And there are people who advocate using the power of each part for self-centred ends. It is crucial for our survival as humanity that we have people in all parts who stand up for fair and solidary relations with the other parts (nations, ethnic groups, religious communities, etc.) and fight for majorities. And these forces can tackle this together across all borders. Just as the agitators on all sides promote each other, the forces for peace can also promote each other. The internet, education levels, foreign language skills and migrants as bridge builders give our one human family greater opportunities than we have ever had before in history. It is up to all of us to utilise them and prevent today's powerful (or imaginary powerful) from destroying humanity out of their self-centred interests! Let's tackle it! Some thoughts on this: Peace is not a gift, it has to be earned (Kant). I am a pessimist of analysis, but an optimist of will. It is not enough to criticise the negative, but it is necessary to start building the new within the old (Gramsci). It is important to see not only the negative in the existing, but also the possible positive. Those who fight can lose. If you don't fight, you've already lost. Bertolt Brecht It is better to light a light than to lament the darkness (from China).
Wolfgang Lieberknecht (IFFW, International Peace Factory Wanfried)
Transkript
0:01
challenges the US uh did aim to build a
0:06
uh uh a a global World a globally interconnected world but on the
0:12
presumption that the US would always be at the center of it and the dominant
0:18
power of it but it meant that the US was ready at a lot of times to take some
0:26
responsibility and to uh pay some cost uh and to take some what was true
0:34
leadership open the markets for other countries before those other countries would open the markets to us Goods or
0:42
actively share Technologies or inventing foreign aid which was an anti-soviet
0:48
move but it was real money given to other countries which is not a usual uh
0:54
you usual behavior in the world and the US had the concept of uh
1:00
so-called trade rounds to uh reduce trade barriers and then eventually to
1:07
create WTO which was a US initiative and so on now the presumption of all of this
1:13
was that a an interconnected world would be good and the US would sit on top of
1:19
it the Mis I won't say it's a miscalculation I would say the
1:25
naive of that view was yeah other countries are going to come long and the
1:30
us being 4.1% of the world population has no right to presume that it is the
1:39
hegemon that gets to determine everything else and lo and behold comes
1:45
China with a population four times larger more than four times larger and
1:53
extraordinarily skillful uh governance uh and uh really
2:00
remarkable uh quality of planning and governance and uh good judgment uh with
2:07
the reforms ushered in by dun sha ping starting in 1978 the US didn't see it
2:14
coming but the China grew at around 10% per year that means you double every
2:21
seven years in aggregate size of the economy that's fast you do that for 35
2:27
years that's five doublings that's 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 that's 32 time increase of
2:36
the size of the economy that's what China achieved suddenly China's bigger than the United States again measured in
2:43
international prices now this is an incredible affront to the Americans not
2:50
to me I think it's great you know China is catching up that's wonderful that's
2:56
what economics is supposed to be all about is it a l for the United States
3:01
not in any real way at all none of China's gains is a loss for the United
3:07
States none of it it just expands World Markets we have H more productivity we
3:13
have new technology we're able to buy a lot of goods and my iPhone made in China
3:20
and so forth uh at low cost it's good but it's an affront to a mindset that
3:28
says we on the show and so starting 10 years ago the United States uh got it in
3:35
its head that we got to stop this it's crazy how can you stop another country
3:40
from achieving development and how can you stop a country 1.4 billion people
3:46
but the United States does genius things like I said the genius thing of saying
3:52
president Maduro is not president it's the one we chose it's nuts okay so what did President Obama decide to do he said
3:59
said we're going to have a a trade agreement with Asia that will not
4:05
include China well du China's the largest trade partner of half the world
4:13
and it's the largest trading economy in Asia by far and the United States in
4:20
its absolute foolishness even explicitly says we need to make arrangements where
4:27
we set the rules the so-call rule-based order well two things wrong with this uh
4:33
one you can't have a trade arrangement in Asia without China are you kidding
4:39
and second we were supposed to make international rules at the World Trade Organization that was the idea of it but
4:45
that means actually that China has a voice and so this is where we are right
4:51
now we are a declining honic power in the United States which has lost its
4:57
nerve which is fighting it thought it was kind of a a walk at least into Ukraine uh with NATO
5:06
and you know a destroyed Russia that was their idea turned out to be a little bit
5:13
naive to say the least an ascendant China a bricks group larger than uh than
5:21
than the US backed G7 group and it there is no hamon anymore but the US fights a
5:30
uh a rear guard on this and the mentality is
5:38
unbelievably weird and out ofd okay Biden lives in the past literally maybe
5:44
even more than we realized but in any event all his tropes which you guys talk
5:50
about and I talk about the indispensable nation and and US leadership
5:57
well the the those are so outdated that they were even funny in the 1990s but
6:05
kind of believable because the Soviet Union had disappeared suddenly in December
6:10
1991 but weird to hear now the US is the indispensible country sorry not quite uh
6:18
the the fight in Ukraine is really the last battle of the expanding Empire I
6:24
call it the tberg forest battle that was when the Roman Empire faced its limit
6:30
finally on the r because Augustus in 9 ad wanted to keep expanding and the
6:36
Germans beat him on the R so Rome never conquered Germania by the way Rome
6:43
remained an empire for centuries so it wasn't the end of the world not to have Roman Legions in Germania and it will
6:50
not be the end of the United States not to have NATO forces in Ukraine but they
6:55
think it is right now so what we're seeing is a a psyche that's
7:03
wounded that is still
7:08
believing we run things uh that still so much wants to run things uh we get I
7:15
assume you get your monthly copy of Foreign Affairs magazine all it is every
7:22
issue is to try to cheer up the Americans that you're still number one every article is China and decline are
7:30
we still the strongest it's it's not even a scorecard that makes sense in in
7:35
in a world of cooperation and economics but to these strategists that rank
7:41
everything this is their their world so we've gone to protectionism we ignore
7:46
the World Trade Organization we break every International agreement we're on the veto side of every un Security
7:54
Council resolution we on the defeated side of almost every UN General Assembly resolution
7:59
what kind of hedge is that it it is a country that was in the lead that
8:06
doesn't offer to other countries anymore only threatens them and you can't
8:12
sustain your power only by threat anyway the power doesn't even it's evanescent
8:18
in that sense when other countries have the same Technologies as you do when we see that the NAT Weaponry is no wonder
8:25
weapons that defeats Putin from one day to the next that Russia is very clever they've got very sophisticated
8:31
Technologies so this is why the whole idea of the hegemonic power is p but if
8:39
you don't know it it's really dangerous and the US doesn't recognize it yet it
8:45
hasn't changed its foreign policy appropriately Professor saaks it's I I
8:52
was wondering if we could go back to the Middle East because the Middle East is such an enigmatic region I mean we've
8:58
had so many wars there there's also I think a widespread view that it has
9:06
never fulfilled its economic promise um over since the second world war um that
9:13
and yet one senses that things are starting to change now we see Saudi
9:18
Arabia and Iran making friends and you've pointed out how Neighbors being
9:24
friends is economically beneficial we see very ambitious Economic Development
9:31
plans in Saudi Arabia itself we see Saudi Arabia and the Emirates joining
9:37
bricks we see Egypt joining bricks and
9:43
Egypt is now also taking steps to um seek industrialization it's uh opening
9:50
an industry park with Russia it's got many contacts with China all of these things
9:58
um and one also gets the sense that lots of young people in the Middle East
10:04
increasingly well educated they got tremendous entrepreneurial flare you see that in
10:11
London where we have a lot of people from the Middle East here so do you sense that it's all finally coming
10:18
together that things AR changing that the Arab states are starting to think for themselves at last rather than take
10:26
you know the take their cue from Washington and London Paris and those sort of places I mean you're in the
10:33
Middle East now yeah it's so I'm I'm in Dubai in the Emirates it it is I think
10:40
it's fair to say an extraordinarily complex region uh it is fair to say it
10:47
really has been an extraordinarily complex region for as long as we have
10:52
history uh because it really and it's the place where history was invented
10:58
after all I think Herodotus is the histories which tells the war of the
11:04
Persians versus the Greeks gives us a flavor of things that went on for a very
11:09
long time afterward so the Middle East is in the middle it's in the middle of
11:16
uh lots of different cultures uh the Turkish world the Arab world the African
11:24
world uh the Western World which became the Imperial Powers centuries ago the
11:32
Russian World so it's an extremely complex region it's of course in the
11:39
world of the three great monotheistic religions Judaism Christianity and Islam
11:47
uh it is uh divided between the oil halves and the oil have knots uh it is
11:56
uh uh the region probably that uh
12:03
was in a way it's a little strange to say but I'm going to say it kind of the epicenter of European imperialism of
12:12
course Europe imperialized Africa uh it imperialized India southeast Asia but
12:19
the Middle East was viewed so strategically uh the Suez Canal uh
12:25
Britain's uh uh transport link to the jewel of of the British Empire to
12:31
India and then in the 20th century when Churchill converted the British Navy
12:39
from coal to oil suddenly the oil of the Middle East was strategically absolutely
12:46
Central and it has basically remained almost that way uh until very very
12:53
recently so you add it all up it's been you know what said about uh about the
13:01
Versa treaty that it was the peace to end all peace uh it created so many more
13:07
Wars but one thing it did was put Britain and France after uh 1919 into
13:14
the center of uh imperialism for another uh another grand war after which the
13:22
United States became the Great Western Imperial power uh it created is Israel
13:29
in which has been the source of repeated war and endless turmoil starting at as
13:37
as a British project uh in the British mandate after World War I uh so to say
13:46
that they've uh turned the corner on conflict would be premature because this
13:52
is a region not only with internal divisions but with so much Mischief
13:59
coming from the outside and we have the American Fleet you know in the in the in
14:05
the Persian Gulf again in in the Eastern Mediterranean again this is a playground
14:12
of great powers that have created such a mess over the past Century but really
14:18
centuries that you can't declare that this is solved
14:24
but I think the key always in these circumstances is to understand it could
14:30
be solved there's nothing fundamental that prevents Solutions and
14:39
exhibit I'll give you three exhibits to that one is the Saudi Iranian rosma the
14:47
Sunni Shia rosma oh you you listen to any lecture
14:53
at Harvard they would have told you completely impossible uh any any uh any
14:58
think tank in London or the United States completely impossible China pulled it off be what was impossible to
15:05
my mind I recently went to from tan to
15:11
Riad the the problems are so shared I wanted them to work together at the time
15:16
it was impossible but now it's possible so that's I this is one uh point of
15:24
showing how this resolution can occur today or I think think it was yesterday
15:29
but the news today who shows up in Greece erdogan erdogan goes to meet his
15:37
Greek counterpart wonderful you know the Greeks and the Turks have been at each
15:43
other's necks basically since the Greek war of independence that you know very well of the
15:49
1820s and erdoan shows up phenomenal I love Greece I love turkey I love going
15:58
to both and I would I think the rosma if it is that would be
16:04
phenomenally smart for both countries and both centers of civilization after
16:10
all uh it's uh there such an amazing fit and uh I was going to give a a third yes
16:18
a third point now this is actually absolutely crucial because we have an ongoing genocide taking place in Gaza
16:25
right now Israel is Mass killing Gins with the most vulgar disgusting
16:34
statements of intent coming from the e from the Israeli political leaders it's
16:39
absolutely criminal in the literal international law sense what's going on
16:45
but what do the Arab leaders say and what did the Arab Islamic leaders say
16:51
when they meet when they met recently in Riad they said we could have peace with
16:58
Israel is actually straightforwardly establish a state of Palestine according to all the UN
17:05
Security Council resolutions and Palestine and Israel live side by side
17:10
in peace and then we normalize our relations with Israel is that crazy to
17:17
believe no it's absolutely possible what stops IT
17:24
zealots on the Israeli side the zealots who are
17:29
are well represented in this terrible right-wing government of Netanyahu that
17:36
believe in what they call Greater Israel which means no Palestinian State nearby
17:42
uh in Palestinian Land by the way despite resolutions of the UN Security
17:48
Council that go back to resolution 242 in
17:53
1967 so you could have you really could have have Israel in peace you could have
18:02
the region in peace between the sunnis and the Shia between uh
18:08
turkey and and Greece uh the West could actually behave itself for the first
18:15
time in a century and and not be so Mis mischievous uh in the
18:21
region and you could actually see this region as a region with the of course as
18:27
you say tremendous Talent young people gobs of money because they have the
18:34
largest Sovereign wealth funds and the Saudis are trying to build cuttingedge
18:40
Technologies the largest solar fields in the world they want to shift out of
18:45
hydrocarbons if there's a way to do it peacefully cooperatively and so we have all the
18:52
reason to help make this work but remember you know the the United States
19:00
absolutely did so much damage to this by
19:05
taking Arab nationalism and considering it the great threat and aiming to break
19:11
it Nasser could have been a partner with with the world and with the West in
19:18
modernization going back to the 1950s the United States had the idea in its
19:25
hegemonic world viw that any legitimate popular government that is
19:33
not under our thumb is a potential partner of the Soviet Union so we can
19:39
only abide by puppet regimes this was the real mentality so Nasser becomes an
19:48
enemy they made him an enemy and this broke Arab
19:53
nationalism and it was a goal of the United States divid impira divide and
19:59
conquer learned from the British very well and it prevented this region from
20:05
getting together and so you ask could it of course it could should it my God no
20:13
question we're not far from it but instead we're in a horrific War and the
20:18
United States are playing as always not just the spoiler by the way but the
20:25
complete enabler every bomb I maybe not every bomb but just about every bomb
20:32
falling on Gaza is an americanmade bomb and this is uh shocking disgusting and
20:41
uh a part of the reason why the region doesn't get out of this mess John Kirby
20:47
actually gave a speech yesterday when he argued that no other country has done more to alleviate the suffering from gin
20:54
than the United States so it was quite a remarkable statement but uh but but I I want to suggest that perhaps the that
21:01
the problem is Alliance systems because classical realists since morgant toau always argued that peacetime alliances
21:07
is really a source of huge instability because we see if you have a military
21:13
power like the United States trying to organize a region it would always have the incentives uh again in the Imperial
21:19
logic of divide and conquer so you see in all continents of the world if you have a conflict with China for example
21:25
whenever there's division between China and India this is a benefit because you can weaken the Chinese and the Indians
21:31
will become more reliant on the on the Americans you've seen that now in Europe as well as soon as we had this war now
21:37
with the Russians we EUR Europe is completely now subordinated to the United States meanwhile the Russians at
21:43
least the objective was to weaken Russia but we also see the same logic in the Middle East of course the more conflict
21:49
you have between the Arabs and Iranians the more loyal the AR will be to America and the more you know you can weaken the
21:55
Iranians but uh but with with the Chinese given that they're not really a
22:00
military power in the same sense and they don't have any peacetime alliances
22:06
formal alliances there there seems to be more of a different systemic incentives from pursuing economic connectivity
22:12
because when the Chinese enter the Arabic States they're very careful also to reach out to the Iranians so doing
22:17
the exact opposite make sure you don't pit them against each other because then China would have to choose and I thought
22:22
the same now with Putin going down to Middle East you know it goes to Saudi Arabia UAE and at the same time you know
22:29
he books an appointment with the Iranian president to come to Moscow just to make sure you know we're not forming Alliance
22:36
Ser like we don't want to choose one and the cost will be to elate the other so is this the would you contrast this
22:42
economic connectivity of organizing a region versus the military militarized
22:48
line system or how would you like why why is China so different in this region for example from the United
22:55
States so you know there are there are uh maybe four theories of international
23:02
relations that are are debated or we in the west debate three but I'm going to
23:09
add a fourth so our dear friend John mimer who's really a wonderful person and and
23:16
a a great political scientist uh has the theory that he calls offensive realism
23:23
uh which is that states compete it's a dangerous world world out there
23:29
everybody senses danger it's a fight for survival uh and therefore you're
23:34
constantly uh pushing against the others and you're constantly yearning for
23:40
hegemony because being the hegemon is the only safe place in the world after all so you're always greatly endangered
23:48
uh and that's a world of conflict and John mimer most famous book is called
23:56
the tragedy of great power politics and he says it's a tragedy and I say John
24:02
you can't write a book that just ends in tragedy you have to give a solution and he says Jeff it's a tragedy and I say no
24:09
you can't accept a tragedy because especially in a nuclear age we can't
24:15
accept that we're going to blow ourselves to Smither on your theory Jeff it's a tragedy okay that's my uh ongoing
24:22
debate with my dear friend John mimer then there's a a a theory that I would
24:28
ascribe to the recently deceased Henry Kissinger which is balance of power that
24:35
you don't need endless struggle you need to create uh and structure a balance the
24:43
balance can be alliances but it's better if it's a kind of concert of Europe
24:49
where the major Powers agree don't push too hard against each other and this is
24:55
why Kissinger was right rightly wisely among the the the big pubas of foreign
25:03
policy against NATO enlargement to Ukraine actually I would say all
25:08
experienced diplomats were was a bunch of foolish politicians like Biden and
25:13
others that push for it but Kissinger says Don't Rock the Boat make a concert
25:20
of big powers and of course his model was the concert of Europe after the
25:27
defeat of Napoleon in 1815 and the structuring together of a
25:33
system in Europe in which the major Powers preserved the peace under metnick
25:39
and then later under bismar there were some skirmishes in Europe more than
25:45
skirmishes German reunification Italian reunification the Crimean War which was
25:51
imperialist War by Britain and France against Russia but by and large the 19th century didn't have a world war between
25:59
the Napoleonic Wars and and World War I so that was the balance of uh Power
26:06
theory that Kissinger tried to put into play the interesting thing about balance
26:14
of power though is that it becomes imbalanced uh because uh it if you had a
26:20
static substrate of relative economic size and Technology you probably could
26:26
fashion a predictable geopolitical and Military equilibrium but Power changes
26:33
and it was of course the rise of Germany that changed the balance of power in
26:38
Europe at the end of the 19th century and this is absolutely uh important to
26:46
understand to keep the balance of power in Europe required tremendous prudence
26:53
and wisdom and bismar had that bismar was a geop political
26:59
genius and he was thrown out when the old Kaiser died and the young kid came
27:05
in and the young kid got it into his head that he was going to compete with Britain for Naval
27:12
Supremacy and bismar said why will we do that bismar was dismissed and there was
27:20
the end of the balance of power because it required genius to hold it together
27:26
and the Kaiser Wilhelm II famously said to bismar what are we going to do if the
27:33
British show up on our Shores and bismar famously said well Kaiser we'll have
27:38
them arrested in other words we don't need to build a worldclass Navy we just
27:44
need to you know B our our our own uh our own time things will be fine but
27:51
vilhelm II didn't believe it got into an arms race with Britain alliances and all
27:57
the rest and eventually World War I broke out so that's the second
28:03
theory my theory is why don't we all get along you know that's my theory I'm I'm
28:10
an economist I learned from Adam Smith that a World Market is better than uh
28:17
protected National markets that global trade is better than mercantilism and uh kind of from Emanuel
28:24
Kant uh in his famous essay on perpetual piece in 1795 that that actually a a a
28:32
set of republics that trade with each other and act peacefully with each other
28:37
is the kind of world that we want now I devote my life to that I work with the
28:42
UN on countless matters and and donate my time to the UN because I believe we
28:48
could fashion an international framework of law uh in which countries could grow
28:55
in which China's success would not be viewed or acted upon as a threat by the
29:01
United States because it's no such thing at all in which the United States could
29:06
not unilaterally sanction Russia or grab foreign exchange reserves because it's against international law which by the
29:13
way it is uh against international law which the US happens to completely ignore so my theory is that cooperation
29:21
is so important that we could actually find our way to achieve it it's a long
29:28
story but it's not impossible to cooperate of course there are cheaters that try to take advantage of of softies
29:35
and so forth and abuse of privileges but we really could have an international
29:41
system of law the United States is the least multilateral country among all
29:47
major economies I've just done a study looking at the number of times the US violates international law basically and
29:54
it's the most of any country because it's all unilateral alism that's being
29:59
you know the would be hegemonic power not abiding by the views of the rest of
30:05
the International System but that's what I would aim for and I don't think it's naive I think it's vital for survival
30:13
especially because we have to Grapple with mass environmental crisis and uh
30:19
horrible depletion of uh our oceans and pollution and many other things that we
30:24
need to deal with together through a Cooperative approach now I said there's
30:29
a fourth approach this is arguable but I think Chinese statecraft really is
30:37
different uh and it's fascinating to me uh and I've just been reading some
30:42
Chinese philosophers who say you know we really think about the world order in a
30:48
different way in a truly Confucian way confucius's greatest the greatest virtue
30:55
for confucious was order orderliness was Harmony you hear that word repeatedly
31:00
it's really a Chinese very deep idea and China is very different from Europe
31:07
which created our International System because in Europe the Roman Empire fell in 476 ad
31:18
and it never came together again Europe remained fragmented after the fall of
31:25
the Western Roman Empire in until today and you could say the European Union is
31:30
the the attempt to put something unified together China has a completely
31:36
different history uh China unified in 221
31:41
BC and by and large with episodes of breakdown that lasted decades not
31:50
centuries China has remained a unified state so China went through the the Han
31:58
Dynasty and the Tang and Song and Yuan and Ming and Ching but as UniFi as a
32:06
unified state so China doesn't have that sense of fragmentation the same way of course it
32:13
always faced Invaders from the north the nomadic Invaders but this is quite different and internal rebellions but
32:21
China has the idea we're unified our Western border is the
32:28
Himalayas okay our Southern border is the tropical rainforest border our
32:34
eastern border is the great ocean our northern border is the Steep region uh
32:40
the Dryland region yes we keep getting some invasions across that way but we
32:45
are a unified State and we our statecraft is that we want Unity across
32:53
the Indian Ocean across the South China China never invaded Japan once not even
33:04
once in 2,000 years except when China was ruled
33:11
briefly by the Mongols and the Mongols tried two failed invasions defeated each
33:17
time by a typhoon which became called the kamakazi winds but the point I'm
33:22
making is that in the west it's fighting all the time how many years were France
33:29
and Britain at War across the English Channel well most of a
33:36
millennium and compare that with China and Japan no Wars no Wars and two
33:46
invasions I think it's 1274 and 1281 if I remember correctly but I may have the
33:52
decade off by one decade and then at the end of the 16th century a kind of crazy
33:59
Shogun of Japan decided that he would invade China he ended up getting
34:06
defeated in Korea in the Korean Peninsula but other than that the two didn't fight and here's what's
34:12
fascinating at the end of the 19th century Japan industrialized first and
34:18
then Japan starting after it it had its so-called Magi Restoration in uh 1868 it
34:26
went into to hypercharged industrialization absolutely remarkable and all subsequent East Asian
34:34
Miracles really follow the uh Magi restoration model but without digressing
34:41
at the end of the 19th century Japan was the single industrial
34:48
power of Asia and Japan literally self-consciously said okay we have
34:54
joined the European club now we can be in Imperial power so Japan launches the
35:01
Sino Japanese war or the Japanese Sino war of uh
35:07
1895 that's when it gains control of uh Taiwan as a colony and its first control
35:14
over the Korean Peninsula which would come a little bit later in as a full
35:20
colony and the the Chinese are dumbfounded by this you know the top
35:25
diplomats of the Japanese and the Chinese were friends and the Chinese
35:30
actually plaintively look at the Japanese saying what are you doing you know the the Europeans are coming to
35:38
attack us and you're you're behaving like them and the Japanese say oh so
35:45
sorry yes we are Japanese but now we're part of their club and so the Japanese
35:50
become European imperialists European style imperialists I should say just to to be clear and the
35:58
the Chinese never became that in their history China never made overseas
36:06
transoceanic Empires You could argue okay it expanded its land mass up to the
36:13
step region up to the Himalayas down to the tropical rainforce to the east coast
36:20
but basically beyond that it never tried to conquer overseas colonies and never had
36:27
them so the argument of this fourth approach is that that China really
36:33
thinks differently about uh about geopolitics John mimer our dear friend
36:40
would say no no no no no this is structural China will become like the
36:46
United States and will compete for a hegemonic status but look at what China
36:52
says every day if you go to the Chinese foreign Ministry web website almost
36:57
every week there's some brilliant ingenious report including about American hegemony including about uh
37:05
China's development initiative its Global strategic initiative its Global civilizations initiative and so forth
37:11
China says no hegemony we don't want hegemony we want Harmony we want to live
37:18
under the UN Charter and the United States says oh that's you know they want to take us over and China says no no we
37:25
don't want that we just want Harmony we can't imagine another country behaving in a
37:31
non-european imperial way but I think it's actually true unless we so damn
37:38
provoke China into terrible Behavior China absolutely in my opinion wants
37:46
cooperation and we should meet it there and cooperate in that
37:51
way I mean I'm not an China expert at all but um I used to to read a lot of
37:57
Chinese philosophy and some literature and I agree one of the interesting
38:03
things about Chinese literature and Chinese painting in which by the way I
38:09
am I mean I I I have a great fondness of Chinese painting is that depictions
38:15
depictions of war are absent from it it's all about it's all about Harmony
38:21
and it is all about peace it's one of the things that attracts me to it yeah
38:27
this is so what a great observation I've never made it or heard it but it's absolutely true you don't see War
38:34
pictures and Conquest pictures I just was in Chinese museums recently and it's
38:39
absolutely correct what you say and I and I never thought about it but it's absolutely true
Jeffrey David Sachs (/sæks/ SAKS; born November 5, 1954)[4] is an American economist, academic, public policy analyst, and former director of The Earth Institute at Columbia University, where he holds the title of University Professor.[5][6] He is known for his work on sustainable development, economic development, and the fight to end poverty.[7]
Sachs is Director of the Center for Sustainable Development at Columbia University and President of the UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network.[8] He is an SDG Advocate for United Nations (UN) Secretary-General António Guterres on the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), a set of 17 global goals adopted at a UN summit meeting in September 2015. From 2001 to 2018, Sachs served as Special Advisor to the UN Secretary General, and held the same position under the previous UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and prior to 2016 a similar advisory position related to the earlier Millennium Development Goals (MDGs),[9] eight internationally sanctioned objectives to reduce extreme poverty, hunger and disease by 2015. In connection with the MDGs, he had first been appointed special adviser to the UN Secretary-General in 2002 during the term of Kofi Annan.[9][10]
Sachs is co-founder and chief strategist of Millennium Promise Alliance, a nonprofit organization dedicated to ending extreme poverty and hunger that has come under scrutiny from critics[11] and was the subject of a book by the journalist Nina Munk. From 2002 to 2006, he was director of the United Nations Millennium Project's work on the MDGs. He is co-editor of the World Happiness Report with John F. Helliwell and Richard Layard. In 2010, he became a commissioner for the Broadband Commission for Sustainable Development, whose stated aim is to boost the importance of broadband internet in international policy.[12] Sachs has written several books and received several awards. He has been criticized for his views on economics and on the origin of COVID-19.
see also this please