Friday, August 1, 2025

Polaris of Enlightenment

UN advisor: “The West forced the war”

The war in Ukraine

  • Prominent economist and geopolitical analyst Jeffrey Sachs, a professor at Columbia University and long-time advisor to the UN Secretary-General, levels severe criticism at the Western handling of the conflict in Ukraine.
  • The conflict could easily have been avoided with a sincere willingness to compromise on the part of the West, Sachs stresses, pointing out that the war in Ukraine was in fact forced by the eastward expansion of the US and NATO.
Published 8 October 2023
– By Editorial Staff
Jeffrey Sachs slams US foreign policy.
6 minute read

In an interview with journalist Andrew Napolitano, former judge in New Jersey’s state court, Sachs shares his analysis of the war in Ukraine and the historical background to the conflict. The prominent analyst traces the conflict back to at least the late 80s when both the USA and Germany assured that NATO would “not move an inch eastward” in connection with East Germany’s accession to West Germany, in a pledge not to threaten Soviet-Russian security interests. However, this verbal promise was broken almost immediately after the final fall of the Berlin Wall, and the military alliance began to expand towards Russia instead.

I actually go back to the late 80s and early 90s because President Gorbachev asked me to help his economic team. President Yeltsin asked me to help his economic team. President Kuchma, the first president of independent Ukraine, asked me to help his economic team. So I’ve watched this close up, notes Sachs on the origins of the conflict.

He points out that already at that time, judging by influential geopolitical advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski, co-founder of the Trilateral Commission along with finance magnate and ultra-globalist David Rockefeller, there were long-term plans from the West to encircle Russia by expanding NATO all the way to Georgia and Ukraine. Sachs emphasizes that the goal of surrounding Russia in the Black Sea is a strategic concept that can be traced back to the mid-1800s and the Crimean War, where Ukraine has long been viewed as the obvious geographical center of Eurasia.

The idea was that U.S. military forces would be in Ukraine, Romania, Bulgaria, Turkey, and Georgia. And you look at the map, Saba Stoppel, the Russian base in 1783 is right there, and then it’s cornered. And the Russians knew this, and they were saying from the early 90s, “don’t do this”.

Ukraine was seen as a crucial piece in the global chess game by the American geostrategist Zbigniew Brzezinski. (Montage. Photo: TUBS/US DoD/CC BY-SA 3.0)

“The only red lines are American red lines”

NATO expanded through Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic, Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia as well as Romania, Bulgaria, Slovenia, and Slovakia – until Russia started to feel increasingly pressured. This led the country’s president, Vladimir Putin, to make clear at the security conference in Munich in 2007 that further NATO expansion couldn’t be accepted. He emphatically warned even then about the danger of an inevitable confrontation if the expansion continued on its current path.

President Putin at the Munich Security Conference really laid it out very clearly. He said, look, you guys promised in 1991, not one inch eastward, all you’re doing is threatening a new conflict stop. Well, I think the defining feature of American foreign policy is arrogance, and they can’t listen. They cannot hear red lines of any other country.

Sachs further notes that throughout the 2000s, the USA systematically carried out influence campaigns in Ukraine to bring the country into NATO. As early as 2004, he observes, the US-financed Orange Revolution took place in Ukraine to bring about a more pro-Western regime change, and in conjunction with this, the USA began publicly declaring that NATO should expand to include Ukraine. A multi-year power struggle ensued in the country, and in 2014, the democratically elected president, Viktor Yanukovych, who advocated for a neutral Ukraine, was overthrown as a result of the so-called Euromaidan protests. These protests followed Yanukovych’s halting of negotiations over a free trade agreement with the EU because Ukraine already had a free trade agreement with Russia, and all three parties needed to resolve the issue before making a decision.

It’s pretty clear in early 2014 that regime change and a typical kind of US covert regime change operation was underway. And I say typical because scholarly studies have shown that just during the Cold War period alone, there were 64 US regime covert regime change operations. This is a, it’s astounding. Serious scholarship has devoted its time to tracing all the times the US overthrows or tries to overthrow other governments. Well, there’s no doubt. The US overthrows Yanukovych, Sachs continues.

The government that subsequently took power in Ukraine, Sachs notes, was handpicked by the United States, as evidenced by a phone recording of Victoria Nuland from the US Department of State, which displayed a very aggressive stance towards the Russian population. In response, Sachs continues, Russia organized referendums in the ethnically Russian part of the Crimea region and annexed Crimea to Russia. The oblasts of Donetsk and Luhansk, with a predominantly Russian population, refused to recognize the new regime in the country and declared independence, leading Ukraine to respond with military action—a conflict that has been ongoing since 2014.

– They were demanding the use of the Russian language, the Russian Orthodox Church, the relations with Russia, the family relations, the travel, the open borders, and so forth, Sachs explains.

– The war began with essentially right-wing militaries like the Azov Battalion and so forth. The Banderistas, pretty fascistic ideologies in some cases attacking in the east. And a lot of people died, thousands and thousands of people were being killed, civilians, ethnic Russian civilians, he concludes.

Russia and the West ultimately negotiated two peace agreements, including the Minsk II agreement which was meant to secure autonomy for Donetsk and Luhansk. The agreement was embraced by both the Ukrainian government and the breakaway republics, and it was guaranteed by Germany and France. The agreement also received unanimous support in the UN Security Council, but was never implemented by Ukraine. According to Sachs, Ukrainian and Western leaders never intended to adhere to it. He refers to former German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s later acknowledgment that the main purpose of the agreement was to buy time to continue arming the Ukrainian military.

The intention of the Minsk agreement was not to achieve consensus – but to arm Ukraine’s army, according to German Chancellor Angela Merkel (Photo: WEF/CC BY-NC-SA 2.0).

“It’s all terribly dangerous”

As recently as the end of 2021, Russian President Vladimir Putin proposed a draft security agreement between Russia and the USA, central to which was a halt to NATO expansion to prevent the outbreak of war, a suggestion that was also ignored by American authorities. It was the USA that decided to terminate negotiations between Ukraine and Russia according to Sachs because they did not want to appear “weak” in front of China.

On February 24, 2022, Russia initiated its military operation, which, according to Sachs, was primarily a last desperate attempt to get Western leaders to resume negotiations. According to the main negotiator, Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett, this was very close to happening until the West decided to withdraw from peace negotiations. Sachs regrets that even at this stage, a diplomatic solution was abandoned in favor of a confrontation that has been particularly devastating for Ukraine.

I know the economic side, that the sanctions weren’t going to work. I understood the diplomatic side. I didn’t know the the military side, but this has been a predictable bloodbath and the Americans have known it, says Sachs, who worries about a full-scale confrontation with the world’s two biggest nuclear powers, the US and Russia.

We’re told, oh, don’t worry about it. Don’t worry about it. But I’ve been studying this issue also for decades. We should always worry about what intemperate, dangerous, people in dangerous circumstances can do, how accidents can happen, how we can lose control of events. It’s all terribly dangerous.


Economist with an extensive CV

Jeffrey Sachs is a prominent economist, geopolitical analyst, and economic advisor who has been ranked as one of the world’s 100 most influential people by Time Magazine on two occasions. He earned his PhD at the age of 26 and became a professor at Harvard University at just 29 years old, where he spent two decades before taking a position at Columbia University.

Sachs is the chair of the UN Network for Sustainable Development Solutions, co-chair of the Council of Engineers for the Energy Transition, an academician at the Vatican’s Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences, and a commissioner for the UN Broadband Commission for Development.

He has also previously served as a special advisor to UN Secretary-Generals Kofi Annan, Ban Ki-moon, and Antonio Guterres, assisted Presidents Gorbachev, Yeltsin, and Kutma, and has written a number of books that have made it onto American best-seller lists – including The End of Poverty and The Price of Civilization.

In total, Sachs has received 42 honorary doctorates and has also received honorary distinctions from, among others, the Presidents of France and Estonia.

Jeffrey Sachs, far right, at the World Trade Organization Forum. Photo: WTO/CC BY-SA 2.0

Watch the full interview here

The full interview with Andrew Napolitano and Jeffrey Sachs can be viewed here.

TNT is truly independent!

We don’t have a billionaire owner, and our unique reader-funded model keeps us free from political or corporate influence. This means we can fearlessly report the facts and shine a light on the misdeeds of those in power.

Consider a donation to keep our independent journalism running…

Russia rules out talks between Putin and Zelensky without final agreement

The war in Ukraine

Published 25 July 2025
– By Editorial Staff
Moscow says no to a meeting between Putin and Zelenskyj before a finished agreement is on the table.
2 minute read

Russia currently rules out a meeting between President Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, unless the parties first agree on the draft of a finished memorandum. This was stated by Vladimir Medinsky, the Kremlin’s lead negotiator in talks with Ukraine, in connection with the latest peace talks in Turkey.

Medinsky, one of the most prominent representatives of the Kremlin in the ongoing peace negotiations, emphasized that a personal meeting between the two leaders is only meaningful if they have already agreed on the terms of a peace agreement and are ready to sign it.

There’s no point in meeting only to begin negotiations from square one, he said, referring to previous summits that in practice prolonged the conflict rather than resolved it.

He also brought up historical cases where heads of state only met to sign already negotiated agreements, not to initiate new processes.

As an example, Medinsky mentioned the Chinese civil war in the 1940s:

Chiang Kai-shek constantly insisted on meeting in person to discuss everything. I believe they met five times, smiled, and posed for photographs, but it did not bring an end to the civil war. The core issues remained unresolved, and the war went on.

The Kremlin’s spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, confirmed Medinsky’s line and stated that Russia considers such a meeting relevant only when a final agreement is in place.

The statements come at a time when the question of a meeting between Putin and Zelensky is once again being discussed internationally as a possible path to peace in Ukraine.

Parties far apart from each other

Many diplomats and international actors, not least in the West, have for a long time advocated direct talks between the two leaders to break the diplomatic deadlock in the conflict.

Volodymyr Zelenskyj has previously expressed a willingness to meet Putin to discuss peace, but has also set demands including the withdrawal of Russian forces and confirmation of Ukraine’s sovereignty as prerequisites.

Russia, for its part, has consistently demanded that the talks should be based on Russian security interests, including control over certain territories – something that the Ukrainian government rejects.

Medinsky’s and Peskov’s statements underscore that Russia does not see any immediate room for a summit as long as the fundamental prerequisites for peace are not already established, which makes the conditions for direct dialogue continue to be difficult.

Ukraine’s parliament passes law undermining anti-corruption efforts

The war in Ukraine

Published 23 July 2025
– By Editorial Staff
SAPO chief Oleksandr Klymenko (left) and NABU director Semen Kryvonos during a press conference in Kyiv after the parliament approved a bill that abolishes the independence of the two agencies.
2 minute read

Ukraine’s parliament adopted legislative amendments on Monday that severely limit the independence of the country’s two central anti-corruption agencies. The opposition and monitoring organizations warn that the reform “destroys” the agencies’ autonomy.

Parliament voted through legislative changes that give the prosecutor general new extensive powers over investigations led by the National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO). The law was adopted with support from 263 parliamentarians, while 13 voted against and 13 abstained, writes The Kyiv Independent.

The legislative amendment still requires Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s signature to take effect, and the president has the option to veto it.

New powers draw criticism

Under the new law, the prosecutor general gains the authority to issue directives for NABU’s investigations or even transfer them to other agencies. The prosecutor general can also delegate SAPO’s powers to other prosecutors and close NABU investigations at the request of the judicial system.

The agencies themselves have reacted strongly to the changes. NABU announced in a statement that the amendments mean “destruction of NABU and SAPO’s independence and practically subordinate their activities to the prosecutor general”.

This is effectively the end of the work of two independent institutions, said Oleksandr Klymenko, head of SAPO, during a press conference after the vote.

NABU’s director, Semen Kryvonos, condemned the legislation and argued that it threatens Ukraine’s Euro-Atlantic integration. He also expressed hope that Zelensky would veto the law.

Just one day before the vote, several law enforcement agencies, including the prosecutor general’s office and the security service SBU, conducted extensive searches at NABU and SAPO. Fifteen NABU employees are being investigated for various crimes, from traffic violations to espionage.

Concerns over aid accountability

While anti-corruption efforts face pressure, questions have been raised about accountability for the extensive Western aid to Ukraine. Since February 2024, the West has provided approximately $314 billion in support, with the Pentagon acknowledging that over $1 billion in advanced weapons systems cannot be properly tracked – though without evidence of theft, but rather due to inadequate tracking systems under wartime conditions.

The most documented corruption case to date linked to Ukraine involves Poland, where the EU’s anti-fraud office, OLAF, discovered irregularities worth €91 million in a generator project for Ukraine. Within Ukraine itself, the security service revealed in January 2024 a corruption scandal worth $40 million where the defense ministry paid for shells that were never delivered.

International monitoring organizations maintain that various control mechanisms have been established, but developments regarding NABU and SAPO now raise concerns that future aid could be affected by weakened anti-corruption efforts.

Russian drone swarms break through Ukrainian air defenses at record pace

The war in Ukraine

Published 22 July 2025
– By Editorial Staff
A Russian Geran drone strikes a building in Kiev, Ukraine in June.
2 minute read

Russia’s mass drone attacks are becoming increasingly successful. Hit rates have tripled during spring while Ukrainian defenses are overwhelmed by new swarm tactics and modified drones.

Russia’s intensified drone attacks against Ukraine are becoming increasingly successful, with drones hitting their targets in three times as many cases as before, according to official data from the Ukrainian air force.

Mass attacks with Shahed drones, originally of Iranian design but now manufactured in Russia, appear to be overwhelming Ukraine’s severely strained air defenses. According to data from the Ukrainian air force, an average of about 15 percent of the drones penetrated defense lines between April and June – a sharp increase from 5 percent during the previous three months.

During the night leading to Monday, Russia conducted an extensive attack with 426 Shahed drones. On July 9, a record attack was seen with 728 drones and decoy drones, as well as several cruise missiles.

New tactics overwhelm defenses

Russia’s tactical innovations have included modifications that allow the drones to fly faster and at higher altitudes, beyond the range of the truck-mounted machine guns that Ukraine typically uses.

The problem is not that the Ukraine air defense is getting worse. Instead, what we see is that new swarming tactics and drones are now flying in higher altitude, which makes them more effective, says Yasir Atalan from the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Russia has named its modified drones Geran, which means geranium in Russian. Geran-3, a turbine-powered variant that can fly up to 800 kilometers per hour, has been used against Kiev in recent weeks.

Ukraine develops countermeasures

President Volodymyr Zelensky said on July 10 that Ukraine is “already shooting down dozens of Shahed drones” with its domestically manufactured interceptor drones. Earlier in the month, he announced an agreement with the American company Swift Beat to co-produce hundreds of thousands of drones.

Our air defense forces are achieving good results with the new interceptor drones and they are performing particularly well, having shot down hundreds of Russian-Iranian Shaheds in a week, Zelenskyy said last week.

Andrew Turner, former air marshal in the Royal Air Force, describes the development as typical of air warfare:

It’s a constant duel and evolution between countermeasures against countermeasures against countermeasures. In Ukraine, this movement happens every 14 days, so it moves at great speed.

Hungary wants EU sanctions on Ukrainian forced conscription officers

The war in Ukraine

Published 16 July 2025
– By Editorial Staff
Hungarian Foreign Minister demands that those responsible must be held accountable for the murder and brutal assault of people who refused to go to war.
1 minute read

Following the Council of Europe report, the brutality surrounding forced recruitment patrols in Ukraine must be covered by EU human rights sanctions. This is the view of Hungarian Foreign Minister Péter Szijjártó.

Referring to the Council of Europe report titled Memorandum on human rights elements for peace in Ukraine, dated July 8, 2025 and signed by the EU Commissioner for Human Rights, Michael O’Flaherty, Szijjártó points out that conscription in Ukraine involves murder, torture, brutal assault and brutal treatment.

— It is a fact that people are dying in Ukraine because of the brutality of the conscription officers, because they don’t want to go to war.

— Where are the NGOs, where are the Soros organizations, where are the so-called independent journalists, where are the human rights organizations, why do they not speak out and say that this manhunt on the streets of Ukraine is unacceptable? asks Péter Szijjártó.

Szijjártó emphasizes that they view it as unacceptable and “shocking” that European politicians remain indifferent to the brutality and stresses that they demand the responsible recruiters be placed on the EU’s human rights sanctions list.

— This is a bare minimum that the EU must do in this issue, he emphasizes.

Our independent journalism needs your support!
We appreciate all of your donations to keep us alive and running.

Our independent journalism needs your support!
Consider a donation.

You can donate any amount of your choosing, one-time payment or even monthly.
We appreciate all of your donations to keep us alive and running.

Dont miss another article!

Sign up for our newsletter today!

Take part of uncensored news – free from industry interests and political correctness from the Polaris of Enlightenment – every week.