Jeffrey Sachs: A Negotiated End to Fighting in Ukraine Is the Only Real Way to End the Bloodshed

[cbabe]

https://www.democracynow.org/2022/12/6/jeffrey_sachs_ukraine_war

Jeffrey Sachs: A Negotiated End to Fighting in Ukraine Is the Only Real Way to End the Bloodshed

With the war in Ukraine now in its 10th month, Russian President Vladimir Putin and U.S. President Joe Biden have both expressed openness to peace talks to end the fighting, as have leaders in France, Germany and elsewhere. This comes as millions of Ukrainians brace for a winter without heat or electricity due to Russian strikes on Ukrainian civilian infrastructure. “This war needs to end because it’s a disaster for everybody, a threat to the whole world,” says economist and foreign policy scholar Jeffrey Sachs, director of the Center for Sustainable Development at Columbia University. He says four major issues need to be addressed to end the war: Ukraine’s sovereignty and security, NATO enlargement, the fate of Crimea and the future of the Donbas region.

…more…

(Please discuss: Who is Sachs? War is a threat to the whole world? Ukraine should negotiate. Give up Crimea. And more. Russian talking points infiltrating even democracy now…?)

[AZSkiffyGeek]

1. Tankies gonna tank

[cbabe]

2. What's 'tankie'?

[haele]

4. Someone who is "in the tank" of a vehicle for an agenda.

Likewise, someone who enables/shoots out propaganda.

That's my understanding of the term. It's not new.

Haele

[cbabe]

6. So, Sachs is shouting out Russian propaganda and DN fell for it?

[AZSkiffyGeek]

8. Democracy Now hasn't exactly been too discerning so far

So I'm not sure "fell for it" is the right term.

[cbabe]

10. What term would you suggest? Or is this DN bias I hadn't recognized in the past?

[Just A Box Of Rain]

30. Democracy Now is pro-Putin.

Nothing new.

Along with The Nation (Katrina vanden Heuvel), Chris Hedges, Noam Chomsky, John Mearsheimer, and a lot more of the far-left who reflexively blame the West for all the world's problems.

Bloody disgrace.

[haele]

13. Wouldn't be the first time an "anti-Western imperialist" critic chooses....

...to view any action by the West in conflicts as bad. Similarly, it isn't the first time anti-war critics will push for conciliation in clear cases where there is an aggressor and a defender because "war is bad". Yes, War is bad.
But when attacked for a spurious policy reason - or little reason at all; both a person and a country have the right to defend themselves.

Ukraine has been developing and acting independently of Russia since the break-up of the Soviet Union. That Russia wants to expand their empire to the former Soviet boundaries should be a red flag to both the anti-imperialist and anti-war critics in progressive forums, but a lot of these critics are wedded to their reputations and just can't seem to get past that when faced with a situation that doesn't fit their comfort zone or pet narrative.

Journalists fall into this trap a lot. (Richard Engle?)

Yes, it would all be better if we can get along. Unfortunately, humans are complex.

Haele

[cbabe]

15. So Sachs is anti western imperialist who wants us to 'all just get along'?

I understand taking a stance and holding to it, usually for a paycheck. Just trying to understand who this guy is.

I’ve been hearing this stance more and more. PBS. CBC. BBC.

So western media is turning against Ukraine?

[haele]

23. May be. US Media is a strange animal.

From the beginning, coverage had been a dichotomy; a gasp of "whatever could have caused Russia to do this horrible thing?", and a subtle push to claim "Russia felt threatened by NATO, which is why they attacked Ukraine".
Both Russia and NATO were painted bad guys. Along with the 2% of Ukrainians who were Nazi adjacent.

Anyway, Ukraine is no longer new and shiny anymore. US media says "time to move on, let's get the talking heads to push negotiations and reconciliation so we can drop it and go into the next news cycle."

Haele

[haele]

24. FWIW, Sachs is a Global Economist, like Friedman.

He started out being a hard Global Capitalist, but hitched his wagon to Climate Change and Tech-bro push for disruptive socio-economic policies, which is sometimes within the Progressive swimlane. This is what he has been basing his reputation on over the past 10/12 years.
Honestly, I don't know why DN is using an economist like Sachs to call for a cease-fire and negotiations in a geo-political situation. But then, I stopped reading the Nation as they started wandering towards a more pro-Putin viewpoint in their geo-political opinion pieces.

Haele

[WhiskeyGrinder]

19. It dates back to supporting Soviet tanks in Hungary. Now it refers to uncritical support of the USSR

or Soviet-style policies.

[yardwork]

37. It's from the Soviet Union sending tanks into Czechoslovakia, I believe.

Stalinists who believe it was right for the USSR to impose control through force. "Tankies" support North Korea, for instance.

[Celerity]

38. tankie refers to the Soviet tanks used to defeat the 1956 Hungarian Revolution & the 1968 Prague

Spring revolt

Stalinists across the world defended the use of the tanks (and basically all Soviet actions, no matter how abhorrent)

[Aristus]

3. The negotiated settlement is: "Russia, get out of our country, or we'll keep kicking your asses!"

End of negotiation.

[Tetrachloride]

5. My name is Inigo Montoya.

[cbabe]

7. Who?

[ProfessorGAC]

33. Well Played! (nt)

[yardwork]

39. Laugh out loud!

[Me.]

9. Big Sanders Backer In 2016

organized the Pope meeting...not very good judgment.

[Hortensis]

42. Yes. The judgement of a man who supported taking the

Democratic presidential nomination away from the Democratic voters and having the superdelegates assign it to his choice is...problematic. Anti-democracy, anyone? Of course all but one U.S. senatorial superdelegate were outraged and upheld their duty.

This was before tRump's camp, watching and studying the opponent running on the Democratic ticket (!), were emboldened, including by the very minor consequences, to go bigger, including taking false claims that Democrats rigged the elections much farther.

I once respected this man, took a MOOC on energy from him, but that was before I knew him better.

[Me.]

45. ...

[WhiskeyGrinder]

11. Jeffrey Sachs is part of the reason Russia is the way it is now so uh

[cbabe]

14. Please explain in more depth. Is Sachs another Russian stooge or what? How does he enable Russia? Ed

Educate me.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

16. He's an economist whose neoliberal "shock therapy" economic policy put post-USSR Russia into its

economic tailspin in the mid/late 1990s. Turns out selling off national industries to oligarchs doesn't lead to stability.

[cbabe]

17. Ah! Thanks! Why is he even on DN?!

[WhiskeyGrinder]

20. Because he chimes in on things like the Green New Deal while also flirting with bizarre

conspiracy theories about covid lab-leaks and so on.

[cbabe]

21. Well, I'm fast losing all respect for DN. Sad.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

31. Because Sachs fits the DN narrative.

[GenXer47]

12. but all wars DO end with negotiation

How else would they end?

[Irish_Dem]

25. How did the Allies negotiate with Berlin or Tokyo?

[Hortensis]

43. Right. Unconditional surrender was required.

[karynnj]

18. While a negotiated end may be the only real way to end it, Russia's positions preclude it

Russia has clearly stated that they want negotiations to start recognizing the area they annexed recently and Crimea which they annexed in 2014, as Russian. The fact is that beyond the fact that the annexation are against international law, Russia has never occupied all that area.

I suspect if Russia continues to do poorly and the war becomes increasingly unpopular, they could have negotiates where Russia gives up all of Ukraine, including Crimea, possibly with the agreement in some reasonable amount of time the UN could monitor an election, maybe open to everyone who lived there in 2014 to determine their future. Even that might be giving Russia too much.

At least Sachs includes those as issues, unlike people like Musk and Russian diplomats.

[cbabe]

22. Russia is now a designated terror 'organization'. And the

US doesn’t negotiate with terrorists (at least publicly). So why is Biden even talking about negotiating with Putin? To somehow keep the lid on any extreme actions until Ukraine gains it’s freedom?

[karynnj]

29. Even Russia interpreted Biden's condition to mean they leave Ukraine

Needless to say, that will not happen without a huge change in Russia.

[Irish_Dem]

26. How do you negotiate with a known liar and cheat?

Who will never keep his word?

[gratuitous]

27. To Be Determined: A party Russia will negotiate with

Since Putin has publicly stated that he's just reclaiming historic lands that belong to Russia, who would Putin accept as a party fit to negotiate with him? And negotiate what? Putin's position is that all of Ukraine belongs to Mother Russia, and it's not really in his nature (or the nature of any dictator) to negotiate his deathless pronouncements.

[cbabe]

28. Sachs suggested Turkey as the mediator.

[yardwork]

40. Right.

[DFW]

46. Considering how well Turkey has treated its minorities, especially, but not just, the Kurds

I would say that Zelensky would have ample reason to nix Erdoğan as a mediator before the discussion goes any further.

[cbabe]

48. Yes. Solidifys my dislike/distrust of Sachs.

[Emrys]

32. If you listen to Russia's state-backed propagandists and Putin,

the whole war in Ukraine is based on the fact that they're unhappy with and totally reject previously negotiated and signed borders and security agreements.

There is therefore no good faith basis for negotiating with Russia, and no guarantee that Putin's regime's word will bind other power bases within the top Russian hierarchy. It's a non-starter.

The only negotiations should be about the procedures for Russia's leadership submitting to war crimes trials in the Hague and the terms, scale and timeframe of reparations.

[Coventina]

34. Fuck that shit. n/t

[DemocratSinceBirth]

35. His shock therapy is what led major Russian industries into the hands of the oligarchs.

His counsel is worse than worthless.

[Amishman]

36. Fine. There can be talks when Ukraine is ready for it. We'll support them the whole way.

If Ukraine wants to continue to pursue the military path to reclaiming what was stolen, we continue providing aid as a good friend and ally.

If Ukraine wants to negotiate, we stand behind them as a good friend and ally at the negotiating table.

Their country, they decide - we just help them find justice.

[Crunchy Frog]

41. He's arguably the one most responsible for this whole mess.

The economic genius who advised early post Soviet Russia on economic "reforms", i.e, "shock treatment", mass privatization. This led to hyperinflation, mass poverty and economic chaos, and privatization through mass theft.

As we know from history, the combination of national humiliation (loss of empire) with economic collapse, acts as rocket fuel for the rise of fascism.

Sachs has now emerged as a prominent Covid conspiracy theorist. He is big on pushing both Chinese and Russian propaganda and talking points, including blaming the US for Russia's war on Ukraine.

An interesting link on him.

https://rdi.org/jeffrey-sachs-americas-fault/

[Hortensis]

44. Appeasement of a power bent on hegemony?

We're been there before. Including with Russia as it seized nation after surrounding nation to create the Soviet Union Putin wants to recreate.

Sachs' previously demonstrated lack of commitment to democracy -- and possibly leanings toward (LW) authoritarianism? -- is evident here also. The people of Ukraine and other nations facing Russian invasion understand that if Russia isn't stopped, they'll die in far greater numbers later and/or surrender to live on under a dictatorship.

The primary goal of Sachs' and others of "ending the bloodshed," price to be paid by other people in invaded nations, always served Russia's strategy, and especially so now when Russia is in trouble. Sachs isn't stupid, of course. He must know that also.

[DFW]

47. THOSE are his "four major issues?"

Putin is in the process of eradicating all Ukrainian access to water, heating, and food at the onset of winter, and Sachs says the four major issues of negotiation should not include ANY of the above?

Sachs is sick (or else, he spends too much time in front of his computer screen), and Amy Goodman has lost her way if she stands behind such an unfeeling position. She never came across to me as someone that heartless. I wonder what brought this on?

What possessed these people to think that poor Putin, sitting in his luxurious digs in the Kremlin, is in need of some consideration from the very people he is trying to bomb back to the Stone Age? Or, maybe more accurately, the Ice Age?