https://www.democracynow.org/2023/5/24/jeffrey_sachs_defense_spending_us_debt
For the past few weeks the talk on international finance markets has mostly been about a debt default by the government of the USA. The United States faced a default on its debt, an eye watering $31,825,000,000,000 (rounded down to the nearest ten billion,)
in
early June had a deal on the debt ceiling not been reached between the Biden administration and Republicans in Congress before then. House Speaker Kevin McCarthy is pushing for sweeping budget cuts and new work requirements for recipients of government programs, including Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and SNAP.
Notably, however, neither Republicans nor Democrats are proposing cuts to one of the biggest drivers of the nation’s debt: the massive U.S. military budget. “We’ve got to get this military-industrial lobby under
control, but it’s hard to do, because it’s a bipartisan affair,” says our guest, economist Jeffrey Sachs, whose recent article is headlined “America’s Wars and the US Debt Crisis.”
Full Transcript:
AMY GOODMAN: Negotiations are continuing in Washington, D.C., over raising the debt ceiling. The United States faces a default on its debt in early June if a deal is not reached between the White House and Congress. On Tuesday, House Speaker Kevin McCarthy privately told Republican lawmakers he was, quote, “nowhere close” to an agreement with the White House. McCarthy and President Biden had met at the White House Monday after Biden cut short his trip to Asia.
McCarthy is pushing for sweeping budget cuts and new work requirements for recipients of government programs, including Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and SNAP, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. The Republicans, however, are not proposing cuts to one of the biggest drivers of the nation’s debt: the massive U.S. military budget.
According to the Costs of War Project at Brown University, U.S. wars since the September 11th attacks have cost over $8 trillion. A separate report by the group estimates 4.6 million people have died since 9/11 as a result of the wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Syria, Yemen, Libya and Somalia. And over the past 16 months, Congress has approved more than $113 billion for Ukraine following Russia’s invasion.
We’re joined now by the economist Jeffrey Sachs. He is the director of the Center for Sustainable Development at Columbia University, president of the U.N. Sustainable Development Solutions Network, has served as adviser to three U.N. secretaries-general, currently serves as a sustainable development solutions advocate under Secretary-General António Guterres. He recently wrote an article headlined “America’s Wars and the US Debt Crisis.”
Professor Sachs, welcome back to Democracy Now! Well, why don’t you lay it out for us? Talk about what’s happening in Washington, the historic possibility that the U.S. could renege on the — could possibly not lift that debt ceiling, and what that means, and how that fits into the budget that Republicans want cut and the budgets they not only want not to cut, but to increase.
JEFFREY SACHS: Well, great to be with you.
You know, it is startling that since the year 2000, the debt that the U.S. government owes to the public has gone from about 35% of our national income to nearly 100% of our national income, or GDP. That has been dramatic because we have been engaged in nonstop wars literally since the start of this new century — Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Yemen and now Ukraine. And we have spent a fortune. But no president has said to us, “These wars are so important that we should pay taxes.” They’ve just put it on the borrowing. And as that Watson Institute study has shown, that you cited, the one at Brown University, these wars have cost us around $8 trillion. That’s direct military outlays. That’s ancillary costs. That’s the veterans’ medical expenses. This has been a very significant proportion of the rise of this debt. Another significant proportion was the financial sector, the Wall Street bailout in 2008 and the pandemic costs. But the wars have been a huge deal.
And it’s bipartisan. This isn’t Republicans or Democrats. Neither party wants to talk about the elephant in the room, which is that we are currently at an incredibly destructive, disastrous and, I would say, avoidable war. The toll is rising, of course, in destruction and human lives, but also in outlays. You mentioned the $113 billion. And there’s more to come, if this administration gets its way. They’re not talking about this in these negotiations. They’re talking about cutting help for the poorest people in this country and to continue the warmongering and feeding the military-industrial complex. That’s why I wrote the article, because it’s shocking. It’s both parties that are not talking about the real issue here.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And, Jeffrey Sachs, if you could talk, as well — you talk about these as wars of choice — what you mean by that, and also the issue of the pressure now to, quote, “modernize” the U.S. military to face potential conflicts with China as another strategic plan that will result in more military spending in the future?
JEFFREY SACHS: These are not only wars of choice, the ones that I mentioned. They are wars of lies, because we’ve never been told the truth about what these fights are about, why we’re doing it. Of course, Iraq famously was on completely phony pretenses, but that’s not the only one. All of them have been based on lies.
When it comes to Ukraine, we knew — our diplomats knew and warned that the continued pressure by the military-industrial complex to expand NATO to Ukraine would provoke war. But they never told the American people that. They never explained it. And 'til this day they haven't explained what this war is really about.
You think about Libya. Again, lies. No explanation. Violation of the U.N. Security Council. You think about Syria. Not only was the whole Syrian effort a lie of the United States, it’s never even been explained to the American people that this was an operation that President Obama ordered the CIA to overthrow the Syrian government. It failed, but it was extremely costly and destructive.
So, these have been wars of choice and wars of lies. They are pushed by the military-industrial complex. They are pushed by neoconservatives in both parties. Now we have new drumbeats of war, not only — as if Ukraine was not devastating and threatening enough with nuclear annihilation, now we’re talking war with China. Unimaginable. It could end the world. And yet this is normal discourse in what passes for grown-up discussion in Washington, which is not grown-up at all, in my opinion.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And I wanted to ask you — you mentioned Ukraine. You’ve written often about this whole way that the American — top officials in the U.S. government, as well as the media, talk about the Ukraine war and Russia’s entry, invasion as unprovoked, this whole issue of being an unprovoked war.
JEFFREY SACHS: I noted that The New York Times has used the word “unprovoked” regarding this invasion 26 times in its editorials, its opinion columns and its invited guest op-eds. They don’t talk about the truth, which is that our own diplomats — I’m talking about U.S. diplomats, including CIA Director William Burns, who wrote a memo that was released by WikiLeaks in 2008. His 2008 memo said this is existential, from Russia’s point of view. If we continue to push NATO enlargement to Ukraine, this could have absolutely dire consequences. Our diplomats have known this all along. But it’s been the politicians, it’s been the military-industrial complex, it’s been the big companies that have been championing NATO enlargement. That’s a lot of weapons sales if you do that.
Even though the risks are completely understood inside the government by serious people, they’re just not heeded. And this has been true about Ukraine all along. And up until the end of 2021, Vladimir Putin put on the table a draft U.S.-Russia security agreement that was based on don’t expand NATO to Ukraine. And that has been Russia’s refrain for 30 years, and yet we don’t heed it, and now we’re $113 billion into this. It is horrible for Ukraine. We’ve trapped yet another country in the middle of our lobbying campaigns, because this isn’t going to work out well for Ukraine. It’s a disaster. It’s like how it worked out for Afghanistan. So, this is what’s really going on. And I wish that The New York Times would carry some truth in this to explain what this is really about.
AMY GOODMAN: Well, Jeffrey Sachs, you also have been critical of Russia’s brutal invasion. And I’m wondering how you see this ending now. And also, as we started, if you could talk about how you see this debate on lifting the debt ceiling ending?
JEFFREY SACHS: Well, this war is going very badly. There were tens of thousands of deaths in this Bakhmut battle just now that Russia has won and Ukraine has lost. And the estimates are that just this one narrow battle cost billions and billions of dollars, not to mention the disaster of how many deaths. So, they’re running through money like there is no tomorrow. And if we’re not careful, there will be no tomorrow.
We need to negotiate a stop to this war, whether it’s an armistice or a real peace agreement. That is what China is saying. That’s what Brazil is saying. That’s what South Africa is saying. That’s what India is saying. Major countries around the world that aren’t part of this NATO-Russia conflict are saying, “Stop, before this completely engulfs the whole world,” which it is at risk of doing. So, I think that moving to negotiations now, whether it’s stopping the fighting and freezing the lines, whether it is really a peace agreement based on Russia leaves and NATO doesn’t go in — this has been the core issue from the very beginning — this is feasible, and the world is demanding it, outside of the so-called Western, what’s really NATO and U.S.-allied, world versus Russia. So, that, I think, is how we could spare lives, save the world and help the budget, by the way.
When it comes to these negotiations on the debt ceiling, I really hope that these negotiators face up to the fact that our military budget, which is 40% of worldwide military spending, is brought dramatically under control, because that’s really how to save money. We are 40% of the world total military spending right now, and more than the next 10 countries combined. We’ve got to get this military-industrial lobby under control, but it’s hard to do, because it’s a bipartisan affair. The Congress and the White House, on both sides, is beholden to this seemingly all-powerful lobby. But this all-powerful lobby is driving us to ruin.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And, Jeff Sachs, I have one final question about both the wars in Afghanistan that the United States — when the United States backed mujahideen forces against — when Afghanistan was occupied by the Soviet Army, many of those guerrillas that the U.S. backed ended up returning to their Arab and African countries and became the basis of jihadist groups like al-Qaeda. There was the unexpected blowback of that U.S. support of that war in Afghanistan. Are we potentially seeing a similar blowback from the war in Ukraine, which has been a country that’s become a magnet, even before the Russian invasion, for neo-Nazi and ultra-right groups from Europe and even the U.S.? Could these foreign fighters now battling Russia in Ukraine become a danger to European democracies in the future?
JEFFREY SACHS: Of course. And it’s a very well-put point. But I would say something even more stunning about this. It used to be said, for decades, that the U.S.-backed the mujahideen in Afghanistan to confront the Soviets, who had invaded Afghanistan. But Zbig Brzezinski let us know the truth a few years ago, before he passed away. And that was that the U.S. supported the mujahideen first as bait to induce the Soviet Union to invade. We started it. We started arming an insurrection to help pull the Soviet Union into an invasion in Afghanistan. It’s shocking in its cynicism, and it left that country at nonstop war and destruction from 1979 until today, a completely ruined, wrecked, hunger-ridden, famine-ridden society more than 40 years, because the U.S. was playing a covert game, with all the backlash that you note rightly, that it created al-Qaeda. It created so many disasters down the road. But it started as a great game, as if this were a game.
AMY GOODMAN: Jeffrey Sachs, we want to thank you for being with us, director of the Center for Sustainable Development at Columbia University, president of the U.N. Sustainable Development Solutions Network. We’ll link to his recent pieces, ”America’s Wars and the US Debt Crisis” and ”The War in Ukraine Was Provoked—ad Why That Matters to Achieve Peace.”
*****
RELATED:
De - Dollarisation: China, Brazil Make Deal To Ditch US Dollar For Bilateral Trades
China and Brazil this week concluded a deal to conduct trade between their nations in their own in their own currencies, ditching the established reserve currency for global trade, US dollar as an intermediary, the Brazilian announced said on Wednesday. This is Beijing’s latest strike against the almighty greenback in its currency war aimed at shifting the balance of geopolitical and economic power from west to east.
U S Regional Bank First Republic Crashes As America's Banking 'Crisis In Confidence' Becomes Contagious
Shares in America's First Republic Bank's crashed when the New York stock market opened for trading this morning. The crash was triggered by a statement issued on Sunday night that sought to ease investor worries about the bank's liquidity situation in the wake of the failure of Silicon Valley Bank. Shares in the San Francisco based regional bank are down 60% on last week's close.
Negative Interest Rates - Final Nail In The Coffin Of Neoliberalism?
Negative interest rates, in plain terms a situation in which we pay bankers for holding our money, are the latest ruse of politicians and economists to make uis start spending our investments and savings, thus kickstarting the global economy thy have screwed up.
Pupils Shut Out Of School Because They Refuse To Wear Gender Neutral Uniforms
Overshadowed somewhat by the idiocies in Parliament this week as Remain supporting, democratically elected MPs try to overturn the democratically expressed wish of the people and keep the UK in The Fourth Reich politely known as the European Union, the idiocy of politically correct, far left authoritarianism in education goes on...
The Elite’s Scheme to Eliminate Cash And Impose Negative Interest Rates
Politicians love inflation, it provides an easy way out of the financial mess they create, Bankers too love inflation because while they lend fiat money, the loans they issue are secured against real assets such as people’s homes and valuables. However both need “the punters they fleece to have faith in the value of the currency they hold or the numbers stored in computers that increasingly represent our wealth ...
Elites Losing The War On Cash? Sweden U-Turns On 'Cashless Society' Agenda
Sweden was leading the the War On Cash, the ruling elite had pushed the idea that a cashless society would protect citizens from crime and be more convenient. There was no mention that in a cashless society we would completely surrender control of our money to banks, and our privacy in financial matters to government security agencies...
A geopolitical move by the globalist control freaks that began as a seemingly innocuous hypothetical discussion several years ago now appears to have become a deep state / corporate policy backed by a propaganda campaign involving some of the most powerful commercial and government agencies in the industrialized world. Throughout this omnibus web page we have called it the War on Cash.
A geopolitical move by the globalist control freaks that began as a seemingly innocuous hypothetical discussion several years ago now appears to have become a deep state / corporate policy backed by a propaganda campaign involving some of the most powerful commercial and government agencies in the industrialized world. Throughout this omnibus web page we have called it the War on Cash.
Lord Rothschild: The New World Order Is At Risk
In the RIT Capital Partners 2014 annual report, the head of Rothschild family banking empire warned that the geopolitical situation is most dangerous since WWII. A year later, Baron Jacob Rothschild repeated his warning about the outcome of "the greatest experiment in monetary policy in history". Little did he know that, they would keep rising, but related to that, he also made another warning which the market has so far ignored:
Government Whistleblower admits Labour Opened Borders to Eastern Europe to ‘Lower Wage Growth’
It should be no surprise then that it was under a Labour government led by Tony Blair, our borders agencgy was ordered to open the door to uncontrolled mass immigration from eastern Europe. The move came folowing a series of secret meetings between Blair and then Bank of England governor Mervyn King in which King “pressed the case” that mass immigration would “lower wage growth” by creating a pool of cheap workers, a former senior diplomat has claimed.
Could Italy’s Banking Crisis Drag Down Mario Draghi?
The latest banking crisis in Italy risks focusing scrutiny on the leadership of both the Bank of Italy and Italy’s financial markets regulator Consob. The decision to give the central bank’s current Chairman Ignazio Visco a fresh six-year mandate despite his having presided over one of the worst banking crises in living memory ...
Cutting Food Stamps for Over 45 Million Americans: The Ruthlessness of the American Ruling Class
The USA's Obama Administration (remember him, Mr. Hope'n'change) has cut the food stamps allocation that supports many millions of America's poorest people. In five years of a disastrously failed Pesidency Obama has alread engineered America's fall from Superpower status. Now the seems to be set on turning it into Ethiopia.
Outbreak Of Democracy In The US Senate
I usually write my own stuff, either off the top of my head or by putting my own perspective to a topical news story. For once however I think it is appropriate to bring you this, seen on Pakalert. It...
Obama Will Sign U.N. Firearms Treaty After It Was Rejected by Senate
Once again The Emperor Obama has ignored Amerca's democratically elected congress and done what he wanted to in spite of the measure having been voted down.
Obama Stabs Britain In The Back Again
Barack Hussein Obama does not even try to hide his hatred of the british or his contempt for democracy. The latest stab in the back from Obama comes in his support for Agentina's claim to sovereignty over the Falkland Islands. We hoipe our leaders will remember Obama's disloyalty when he comes looking for support for his latest war
When Lefties Tell You They Are Liberals Look For The Nazi In The Closet
The left have always been quick to shout Nazi whenever a conservative or libertarian was getting the better of the argument. but socialism is the parent of fascism and the authoritarianism of modern liberals and 'proressives'is far closer to the politics of Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin and Mao Tse Tung than either Benjamin Disraeli or Margaret Thatcher ever were.
So Why Is Nobody Happy
Americans love to tell us they are the greatest country on the planet, American exceptionalism places them above other nations, theirs is the most powerful economy, the mightiest military (yet in ten years they cannot defeat a bunch of beared ragheads with AK47s and IEDs), they have the most advanced technology and the highest living standards. So why
Burnham has already expressed his opinion on 'the markets' and seems to believe he can ignore them and introduce whatever public spending policies he has in mind. The previous Labour government left a 'no money' note when it exited in 2010; the one before it had to apply to the IMF in 1976 for a fiscal bail-out. The common denominator then and now being that of SOCIALIST GOVERNMENTS running out of cash and credibility as they slide towards authoritarianism.
A financial or currency shock - as we saw with the Soros bet of a similar amount in the 1990s - during the handover of Starmer to Burnham could be politically exploited to reset the UK’s economic baseline. It would weaken confidence in the incoming Burnham government, justify tighter controls on the financial system which, so long as things go according to plan, then shifts public appetite toward more state intervention, and creates the opening for reforms like a CBDC that would have been harder to sell before.
It is the road to communism.
FROM THE ARCHIVE