Latest news with #JeffreySachs
South China Morning Post
6 days ago
- Business
- South China Morning Post
Are we globalising ourselves out of community?
According to US economist and political analyst Jeffrey Sachs, globalisation did not occur only in recent decades, but began as early as when humans started migrating out of Africa tens of thousands of years ago. Like it or not, globalisation will soldier on unfazed and is merely entering a new phase. As history has shown, its reach and character will evolve with the advance of technology and various national policies, affecting us both positively and negatively. The voyages of figures like Christopher Columbus and Vasco da Gama globalised travel and trading by sea while also giving rise to transoceanic empires , colonisation and the proliferation of slavery. The Industrial Revolution accelerated the world's scientific discoveries and revolutionised modes of production while eventually bringing about our reliance on fossil fuels and the resulting environmental dangers We are now living in the digital age of globalisation . People, goods and services are connected more than ever, and new ideas are ever at our fingertips. Governments and corporations collect big data, not just domestically, but internationally.
The Star
24-07-2025
- Business
- The Star
Hong Kong will play leadership role in global sustainable development: U.S. economist Jeffery Sachs
HONG KONG, July 24 (Xinhua) -- U.S. economist Jeffrey Sachs on Thursday said that Hong Kong will play a unique leadership role in the global pursuit of achieving sustainable development by becoming a green financial center for the world. At an event hosted by the Hong Kong Association of External Friendship, Sachs said Hong Kong can leverage its robust common law framework, deep integration with the international financial and trading systems, and its partnership with other cities in the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area. "The Greater Bay Area is a world-leading production, education and financial center," said the professor at Columbia University, adding that the region is unique in the world in terms of its sizable population and transportation connectivity. "The Belt and Road Initiative is my favorite foreign policy initiative in the area of sustainable development," said Sachs. Backed by the production prowess of the Greater Bay Area, Hong Kong can seize opportunities provided by the Belt and Road Initiative to help finance green development projects in developing countries, he said.
RTHK
24-07-2025
- Business
- RTHK
'US Unesco exit gives way to Chinese leadership'
'US Unesco exit gives way to Chinese leadership' Economist Jeffrey Sachs says Hong Kong can contribute to regional sustainable growth by utilising its role in the Greater Bay Area. Photo: RTHK A prominent US economist on Thursday said that Washington's decision to exit Unesco for the third time will allow China to play a bigger role in leading global sustainability development, while Hong Kong would also be able to grasp opportunities. The comments came after Washington earlier announced the decision to leave the UN's cultural and education agency, saying that the institution's work to "advance divisive social and cultural causes" goes against its "America First" policy. Delivering a keynote speech in Hong Kong on sustainable development, Jeffrey Sachs, an economics professor at Columbia University, said that the US exit will have consequences in the coming years. "My basic belief is that the rest of the world has to get on with it, and the rest of the world has to say, we go on for our planet, we expect you to return. "[But] I wouldn't mind if someone keeps a tally of everything the US owes that it's not paying, so that there's a bill at the end of this self-imposed isolation," he said. "I do believe that China has a unique role to play, and China has the capacity that the world needs for transformation," he added. Pointing to China's massive industrial chain, he said the nation could increase exports in areas such as solar power to emerging markets and developing nations to turbocharge the global energy transition. Separately, Sachs also noted that Hong Kong will be able to contribute to regional sustainable growth by utilising its role in the Greater Bay Area. "There are a few financial centres around the world that have the potential to play a major role in sustainable development finance, and I think Hong Kong is the best-placed of all of them," he said. "Dubai cannot do this, Singapore can't do this, because the physical investment [for such large scale projects] is going to come from China". The forum, organised by the Hong Kong Association of External Friendship, took place at the Convention and Exhibition Centre, attracting some 300 participants.
AllAfrica
22-07-2025
- Politics
- AllAfrica
Confucian peace myth: East Asia minus US risks disaster
Skip to content History shows the notion of a 'Confucian peace' in East Asia is a myth. Image: X Screengrab Recently, several arguments have emerged suggesting that Korea, Japan and China could peacefully coexist without the US's presence in Northeast Asia. Columbia University economist Jeffrey Sachs recently argued that China has never invaded Japan in its entire history – aside from two failed attempts – and characterized Japan's incursions into China as anomalies. Citing Harvard sociologist Ezra Vogel, he claimed the two Confucian civilizations enjoyed nearly 2,000 years of relative peace – a striking contrast, he noted, to the near-constant wars between Britain and France. Yonsei University professor Jeffrey Robertson added that, as 'US attention drifts away from East Asia, the unthinkable becomes thinkable' – a region where Europe, Russia, India, and China balance each other imperfectly, but none dominates. Political scientist John Mearsheimer also weighed in: 'If I were the national security adviser to Deng Xiaoping – or Xi Jinping – and they asked me what I thought about the US military presence in East Asia, I'd say, 'I want the Americans out. I don't want them in our backyard.'' This vision of a self-balancing Asia – shared by economists, sociologists, strategists and realists alike – assumes that history, culture and trust can fill the vacuum left by American power. But can it? Sachs's notion of a historical 'Confucian peace' collapses under scrutiny. In his speech, he conveniently omits Korea – arguably the most Confucian state in East Asia – which has frequently been at war with both China and Japan. Consider Goguryeo, one of Korea's ancient kingdoms. Confucianism had already been influential in the region for 400–500 years when Goguryeo emerged. Yet Goguryeo fought multiple wars against various Chinese dynasties: Han, Liaodong, Wei, Lelang, Yan, Sui and Tang. While modern Chinese narratives frame Goguryeo as a tributary, historical records – marked by repeated wars and political stalemates – depict it as a rival power that directly contributed to the collapse of multiple Chinese dynasties. As for Japan, the fact that typhoons thwarted China's attempts to conquer it doesn't mean those efforts lacked seriousness. On the contrary, China was determined. After its initial invasion in 1274 – involving 900 ships and 40,000 troops – ended in failure, it doubled down. In 1281, it returned with 4,400 ships and 140,000 troops – the largest seaborne invasion force in world history before D-Day. To claim that China 'never invaded' simply because these attempts failed is nonsense. These were not theoretical plans – they were full-scale invasions, launched with overwhelming force and clear intent. Typhoons may have stopped them, but they do not erase the historical fact of the invasions themselves. Robertson's claim that the US is 'drifting away' from East Asia is inaccurate. Washington isn't pulling back – it's doubling down. The goal is clear: contain China. This has been official US policy since Hillary Clinton's 2011 article, 'America's Pacific Century,' which outlined a strategic pivot to Asia as the cornerstone of US foreign policy. The US may be distracted by Ukraine and Gaza, but its top strategic priority remains unchanged – and is, in fact, becoming more focused. Washington has bolstered its Indo-Pacific posture through large-scale multinational exercises, such as the 40,000-strong Talisman Sabre in Australia, and expanded military deployments under AUKUS, rotations through Guam and greater access to bases in the Philippines through the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement. Mearsheimer says China wants the US out of East Asia. That may seem true on the surface – but the reality is more complicated. After World War II, China initially viewed US security treaties with Japan, Korea and Taiwan as part of a broader strategy to contain its rise. In an October 1971 meeting with US National Security Advisor Henry Kissinger, Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai accused Washington of using Taiwan and Korea as 'two wings of outward expansion by Japanese expansionist policies.' Zhou Enlai and Henry Kissinger in Beijing in 1971. Photo: Henry Kissinger Archives / Library of Congress In response, Kissinger offered a candid and far-reaching explanation of why the US maintained its military presence in Japan. 'China,' he said, 'has a universal outlook; Japan's has had a tribal outlook.' More than cultural commentary, this was a strategic warning. He argued that 'the Japanese are capable of sudden and explosive changes. They went from feudalism to emperor worship in two to three years, and from emperor worship to democracy in three months.' Such volatility, in Kissinger's view, made a self-armed Japan a latent threat – not because of intent, but because of potential. 'A Japan that defends itself with its own resources will be an objective danger to the region. The US alliance actually restrains it.' He acknowledged the cynical alternative: 'We could cut Japan loose and let it stand on its own. That would trigger tension with China and let us play the middleman.' But he dismissed that option as dangerously shortsighted: 'Either you or we would end up the victim.' Kissinger warned against romanticizing US withdrawal. 'We didn't fight World War II to stop Japan's domination of Asia only to enable it 25 years later. If Japan truly wants us out, we'll leave – but I don't think you should rejoice when that day happens, because some day you may regret it,' he said. The shift in Chinese thinking was so significant that Zhou began to question whether the US could truly restrain what he called the 'wild horse' of Japan. Chairman Mao even encouraged Kissinger to maintain good relations with Japan. 'When you pass through Japan, you should perhaps talk a bit more with them.' On Kissinger's most recent visit, Mao remarked, 'You only talked with them for one day, and that isn't very good for their face.' The conversation took place in 1971, seven years after China had become a nuclear power and while Japan remained non-nuclear. Yet Beijing was still deeply uneasy about what a remilitarized Japan might do without US oversight. That fear lingers to this day – not just in China, but across all the nations that clashed with Japan in the first half of the 20th century. Historian Kenneth Pyle distills Kissinger's view in contemporary terms: The real issue is trust. 'Part of the answer' regarding the continued US presence in Japan, says Pyle, 'lies in a fundamental, often unspoken question in the minds of US policymakers: Can Japan be trusted to participate responsibly in international security affairs?' He continues, 'This Japanese question is at the core of American thinking about its alliance with Japan and beclouds the issue of how Japan should contribute to the maintenance of the international order. Mindful of Japanese nationalism and militarism, world leaders are intensely ambivalent as to whether Japan should enlarge its security role.' 'Prompted by a fear of revived Japanese nationalism, US leaders are extremely circumspect toward Japan. This feeling recurs throughout Asia, in the Soviet Union, and in Europe – indeed, in Japan itself.' 'This concern must be resolved, for it is fundamental to the continued relationship between the United States and Japan and to the potential role of Japan in the changing pattern of international relations in East Asia.' Perhaps the most surprising endorsement of US presence in East Asia comes from an extremely unlikely source – North Korea's Kim Jong Un. In 2022, Mike Pompeo, who had been US secretary of state during Donald Trump's first presidential term, revealed: 'As we developed our relationship more fully, what became very clear is he [Kim Jong Un] views the United States of America on the Korean Peninsula as a bulwark against his real threat, which came from Xi Jinping.' Kim Jong Un rules over what was once the heartland of Goguryeo – and he knows who the real enemy is. He has reportedly told his aides in the past: 'Japan is the 100-year enemy, but China is the 1,000-year enemy.' The real question isn't whether China becomes a hegemon in Asia. It's what comes next. That's what most commentators overlook – yet it carries the gravest consequences. Once a regional power secures dominance, it no longer has to watch its flank – it becomes 'free to roam.' When China eventually pushes into the Western Hemisphere, it will challenge the Monroe Doctrine – Washington's historical red line – for the first time since the Cuban Missile Crisis. The resulting showdown could rival, or even surpass, that Cold War standoff. In comparison, current and potential proxy wars in Ukraine, the Middle East, Taiwan and Korea would look like child's play. Calls for an 'Asia without America' might sound like peace. But remove the US and the ghosts of history come rushing in – from Goguryeo's defiance to kamikaze invasions, from Japanese militarism to Cold War paranoia. In Northeast Asia, peace without the US isn't just unlikely – it's historically unprecedented, strategically reckless and potentially catastrophic. Hanjin Lew is a political commentator specializing in East Asian affairs.
Russia Today
05-07-2025
- Health
- Russia Today
Covid ‘almost surely' made in US lab
Covid-19 was almost certainly developed by US scientists and later sent to the Wuhan lab in China for testing, American public policy analyst Jeffrey Sachs has claimed. He made the statement in an interview with Andrew Napolitano on the Judging Freedom podcast on Saturday. The coronavirus that caused the pandemic 'from the very beginning had the telltale signs that it was made in a laboratory,' Sachs said, adding that he studied the problem for years while chairing a global commission on the issues. The CIA 'finally' released the truth, which is that the virus came out of a lab, he said. The agency stated in January that it believes it is 'more likely' that Covid-19 originated from research than that it occurred naturally. What they didn't tell you and what's quite important is that it almost surely was made in a US laboratory. Not in a Chinese laboratory. Covid-19 may have been tested in a research facility in China, 'but it was made in a US laboratory, probably in the University of North Carolina (UNC),' Sachs said. 'One very good theory is that the Wuhan facility has a colony of a specific kind of bat population that the US scientists wanted to use for testing this new virus,' he elaborated. The official position of the administration of US President Donald Trump is that the pandemic originated from a lab leak at the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China. However, according to Sachs, 'there's a big trail of evidence' pointing to Covid-19 being developed in the US. It's awful. And it was hidden by the Biden administration. Sachs noted that UNC is refusing to release work emails sent throughout 2019-2021, despite being sued. 'They're holding these emails secretly and fighting, fighting nonstop to keep them from public scrutiny,' he added. UNC and US-based nonprofit organization EcoHealth Alliance have been repeatedly questioned by Congress since the pandemic due to their work with the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Last May, the US Department of Health and Human Services suspended all federal funding to EcoHealth, citing concerns over its high-risk research and lack of oversight. Russia has repeatedly expressed concerns about the biological research laboratories supported by the Pentagon and other US agencies abroad, especially near Russian borders, accusing Washington of carrying out covert bioweapon research. The former commander of Russia's radiological, chemical, and biological defense forces, Lieutenant General Igor Kirillov, had repeatedly accused the US of maintaining secret biolabs in Ukraine and elsewhere prior to his assassination by Ukrainian agents.
