The world-renowned American professor of economics and president of the UN’s Sustainable Development Solutions Network, Jeffrey Sachs, spoke to Harici: “Multipolarity offers the chance to break free of the grip of a single hegemon and the chance for less oppression, more freedom, and more global equality.”
Prof. Jeffrey D. Sachs is Chair of the United Nations (UN) Sustainable Development Solutions Network and Director of the Centre for Sustainable Development at Columbia University.
A global expert on sustainable development, Prof. Sachs also served as Special Advisor to UN Secretaries-General Kofi Annan (2001-2007), Ban Ki-moon (2008-2016) and António Guterres (2017-2018) between 2001-2018.
Jeffrey Sachs, known for his effective strategies in combating human-induced climate change and preventing extreme poverty as well as economic issues, is the winner of the 2015 Blue Planet Award, an important global award for the environment. Time magazine has twice named Prof. Sachs as one of the 100 most influential world leaders, calling him ‘the most recognised economist’, while The New York Times has described him as ‘the world’s most important economist’. In addition, Prof. Sachs was ranked among the three most influential living economists in a survey conducted by The Economist.
Jeffrey Sachs answered our questions about the ‘new world order’ discussions based on concepts such as multipolarity, global south, rising powers and hegemonism.
Let’s start with a general question. What opportunities does multipolarity offer for humanity and the world? What are the risks?
Multipolarity offers the chance to break free of the grip of a single hegemon, whether the UK in the 19th century or the US after 1945. Multipolarity offers the chance for less oppression, more freedom, and more global equality. However, multipolarity can also mean more conflict, unless the multipolar world is well governed by international law under the UN Charter and by a reasonable balance of power and equality of technology across the major regions of the world.
Speaking of balance of power, can we bring the point on UNSC and increasing criticism to it as the Council does not represent the world equally. From an academic perspective, what would be your policy recommendation for UN reforms and UNSC structure?
Two core reforms. First, India should become a permanent member. 1.4 billion people, third largest economy in the world (measured in PPP), and a nuclear power. Second, the veto should be reformed, for example, ensuring that a super-majority (12 votes or more) can overcome a veto. Other possible changes (e.g., a larger UN SC, more regional representation, a permanent seat for the African Union, etc.) should also be considered.
How do you see the future of the European Union and Europe in the new world order, what are your predictions?
Europe’s geopolitical role has declined markedly since the end of World War II. Europe was the first industrialized region of the world in the 19th century, and it leveraged that economic advantage into global imperial dominance by end of the 19th century. Two world wars and the Great Depression brought Europe’s global dominance to an abrupt end, and Europe became dependent on the United States for Europe’s post-World War II security. Europe of course remains generally rich and prosperous, but it has mortgaged its geopolitical independence to the US, to Europe’s real disadvantage. The Ukraine War, which started in 2014 with the US coup that overthrew the Ukraine government, has been a very heavy blow to the European economy. If Europe is smart, it will regain its geopolitical independence from the US, and restore normal relations with Russia and China.
What would help Europe, at least major European countries such as Germany, France etc. to normalize relations with Russia and China? In the US, it is expected that if Trump wins the elections, a very quick normalization is expected. What is the receipt for Europe?
Europe should have resisted the expansion of NATO, and focused on the OSCE and Collective Security in Europe. It’s not too late. We still need an approach in Europe and Eurasia more generally not based on NATO but on collective security.
Do you see the potential for a new Cold War in the world?
The US has launched a new Cold War in the attempt to maintain its hegemony. It will not work. The US is overstretched, and the US cannot “contain” China or defeat Russia. Still, the risks of military escalation are very real and very dangerous. The US should shift from a Grand Strategy of hegemony to a Grand Strategy of global cooperation under the UN Charter.
Can you explain Grand Strategy of global cooperation a bit more please?
The US should stop trying to dominate the world, and should remove military bases from dozens of countries. The focus should shift to cooperation within the UN Charter and UN institutions, to promote global sustainable development, climate safety, and nuclear disarmament.
What are your expectations for the US elections? Can Trump come back again, and what will happen if he does?
As of today, Trump is odds-on to win, but there are many, many large uncertainties. There is a good chance that Biden will not be the Democratic Party candidate. He is clearly too old and infirm. A third-party candidate, Robert Kennedy Jr., can be a very strong candidate. The next few months will be highly unpredictable.
What if Robert Kennedy Jr is the candidate and elected? What should we expect in the US foreign policy different than the policies of Trump and Biden?
Robert Kennedy Jr. believes that the US military-industrial complex is far too large and dangerous for America’s own security. I would expect a foreign policy based much more on diplomacy, and much less on NATO and the military.
Will the military industrial complex have a stance or involvement in the US elections?
It will try, using campaign contributions as leverage. The American people, however, are tired of the endless wars and gargantuan military budgets.
One of the biggest debates about China is whether a ‘peaceful rise is possible’. China often says in official discourse that it has no intention of becoming a hegemon. Do you think this is just rhetoric or will China integrate into the existing international system?
China is a good global citizen. It is not a hegemon and won’t be one, especially as its population ages and declines in absolute numbers in the future decades. In the past 40 years, China has not fought a single war. In the past 40 years, the US has fought perpetual wars in Iraq (twice), Yemen, Syria, Libya, Afghanistan, Serbia, Ukraine, and beyond. China is actually more multilateral and UN-oriented than is the US these days.
Can you give us your take about the Global South and the rising Asia? Please comment on the institutions such as BRICS, ECO etc. Do you expect them go beyond than being regional unions?
The “Global South” constitutes around 85 percent of the world population. The G77+China has 80% of the world population. The 10 BRICS countries (the original five, Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, and the new five, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates) constitute around 38% of world output, compared with around 30% for the G7 (US, UK, France, Italy, Germany, Japan, and Canada). The Global South rejects the Hegemony of the “Global North” (led by the US). In the end, the Global South point of view will prevail, as we are moving beyond the Hegemonic Age to a true Multipolar World.
There is criticism saying “What has BRICS achieved up to now?”. What would your response be?
The BRICS are strengthening their economic and financial cooperation amongst themselves, fostering new institutions such as the New Development Bank (based in Shanghai), promoting programs such as the Belt and Road Initiative, and now the design of non-US dollar payments and settlements systems for international trade and finance. I believe that the BRICS will be a highly constructive force in the world economy.
Who do you think is the loser in the Ukraine war? Will Europe become a more powerful and decisive pole in the world at the end of this war, or will it become more dependent on the US?
The big loser, of course, is Ukraine. The US launched the war in 2014 (by overthrowing President Yanukovich) to surround Russia by NATO, but in fact, the US has, tragically, done much to destroy Ukraine. Europe is weakened, Russia is strengthened, and the BRICS have become even more unified and expanded in part due to the war.
