I inaugurate this new series of columns in a new year and a new beginning for Brazil with the inauguration of Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva. His well-wishers poured out across the country in a revival of hope for Brazil after four years of disastrous rule under his right-wing predecessor, Jair Bolsonaro, who fled Brazil for Florida on the eve of Lula’s inauguration.
Bolsonaro left behind a mob that rampaged government office buildings before being arrested in large numbers by the police.
The mob tactics are unlikely to stop Lula, and they would not have a long-term effect in the US, where former US president Donald Trump’s similar maneuvers on Jan. 6, 2021, were also shut down. In both cases, demagogic politicians used social media to rile up a mob, and in both cases, the mob was put down within the day.
The real issue is not the mob, but the deeper changes in the world that are generating growing tensions in world politics and economy. The deep changes cannot and would not be stopped by mobs. The challenge is to understand the deeper changes at play so that they can be managed for the common good. Such an understanding is the aim of my future columns.
The biggest turmoil is geopolitical. We no longer live in a US-led world, nor in a world divided between the US and its rival, China. We have entered a multipolar world in which each region has its own issues and role in global politics. No country and no single region can determine the fate of others. This is a complex and noisy environment — with no country, region or alliance in charge of the rest.
One reason why Lula’s return to the presidency is so consequential is that Brazil is likely to be a key regional and global actor. Lula would work closely with like-minded progressive presidents in Argentina, Chile, Colombia and elsewhere in South America.
Brazil would also hold the presidency of the G20 next year, part of a four-year run in which major emerging economies hold the G20 presidency — Indonesia last year, India this year and South Africa in 2025.
The management of a multipolar world is fraught with difficulties. We urgently need more dialogue with other countries, and to move beyond the simplistic propaganda of our governments. The West is bombarded daily with ridiculous official narratives, most originating from Washington: Russia is pure evil, China is the greatest threat to the world and only NATO can save us.
These naive stories, endlessly spun out by the US Department of State, are a great hindrance to global problem-solving. They trap people in false mindsets, and even in wars that should never have occurred and which must be stopped by negotiation rather than escalation.
When the reality of this multipolar world is accepted, we can finally solve problems that have so far eluded us. First, we can understand that military alliances such as NATO offer no answers to the real challenges.
Military alliances are a dangerous anachronism, not a true source of national or regional security. It was, after all, the US attempt to expand NATO to Georgia and Ukraine that triggered the wars in Georgia (in 2010) and in Ukraine (2014 until today). Nor did the NATO bombing of Belgrade in 1999, the 15-year failed mission in Afghanistan or the bombing of Libya in 2011 accomplish any real objectives.
China is not the grave threat that is portrayed in the West. The US tries to pretend that it is still a US-led world, and that China is a dangerous pretender that must be stopped.
However, the reality is different. China is an ancient civilization of 1.4 billion people — about one in five people in the world — that also aims for high living standards and technological excellence. Global problems cannot be solved by vainly trying to “contain” China, but they can be by trading, cooperating and also competing economically with China.
Other great global challenges lie elsewhere: the deep dangers of environmental catastrophe; rising inequalities; and the onrush of new technologies that can disrupt the world if they are not properly harnessed and controlled.
Brazil is the epicenter of the environmental challenge. Can the Amazon rainforest, which constitutes half of the world’s rainforests, be saved? Lula came to power promising to do just this. He won the vote of the Amazon states of Brazil.
Globally, Europe is in the environmental lead with the European Green Deal. Europe’s main geopolitical opportunity is to encourage other regions, including the African Union, China, India, the Americas and others, to adopt their own bold green deals. That is a far better task for Europe than expanding NATO, fighting an endless war in Ukraine, or confronting China.
Brazil is also an epicenter of inequality, with one of the highest degrees of inequality in the world. That inequality was originally created by European imperialism that suppressed indigenous peoples and enslaved millions of Africans. Their descendants continue to pay the price. Social justice is Lula’s calling, and a global calling, after centuries of racial and social injustice.
Brazil can also be an epicenter of new technologies. For example, a leader in the new bioeconomy in which the wonders of the Amazon’s and Brazil’s biodiversity are not destroyed for more cattle ranches, but is instead used to produce new life-saving medicines, nutritious foodstuffs or advanced biofuels for green aviation.
Technological change is perhaps the deepest driver of global change. New technologies are needed to confront the crises of climate change, hunger, education and health.
However, people also suffer when new digital technologies are misused, such as to mobilize mobs or produce killer drones in Ukraine. Advanced biotechnology might have even created the virus that causes COVID-19 — it is still unknown. Every day we confront the disruptions and inequalities caused by artificial intelligence, robotics and the rapid overturning of jobs.
The confluence of global change, disruption and danger is astounding. Solutions lie in understanding, cooperation and problem-solving. A better understanding of the New World Economy is the aim of this column in the months ahead.
Jeffrey D. Sachs is a university professor and director of the Center for Sustainable Development at Columbia University, and president of the UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network.
The views expressed in this column are his own.
In the event of a war with China, Taiwan has some surprisingly tough defenses that could make it as difficult to tackle as a porcupine: A shoreline dotted with swamps, rocks and concrete barriers; conscription for all adult men; highways and airports that are built to double as hardened combat facilities. This porcupine has a soft underbelly, though, and the war in Iran is exposing it: energy. About 39,000 ships dock at Taiwan’s ports each year, more than the 30,000 that transit the Strait of Hormuz. About one-fifth of their inbound tonnage is coal, oil, refined fuels and liquefied natural gas (LNG),
On Monday, the day before Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) departed on her visit to China, the party released a promotional video titled “Only with peace can we ‘lie flat’” to highlight its desire to have peace across the Taiwan Strait. However, its use of the expression “lie flat” (tang ping, 躺平) drew sarcastic comments, with critics saying it sounded as if the party was “bowing down” to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Amid the controversy over the opposition parties blocking proposed defense budgets, Cheng departed for China after receiving an invitation from the CCP, with a meeting with
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) is leading a delegation to China through Sunday. She is expected to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Beijing tomorrow. That date coincides with the anniversary of the signing of the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA), which marked a cornerstone of Taiwan-US relations. Staging their meeting on this date makes it clear that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) intends to challenge the US and demonstrate its “authority” over Taiwan. Since the US severed official diplomatic relations with Taiwan in 1979, it has relied on the TRA as a legal basis for all
To counter the CCP’s escalating threats, Taiwan must build a national consensus and demonstrate the capability and the will to fight. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) often leans on a seductive mantra to soften its threats, such as “Chinese do not kill Chinese.” The slogan is designed to frame territorial conquest (annexation) as a domestic family matter. A look at the historical ledger reveals a different truth. For the CCP, being labeled “family” has never been a guarantee of safety; it has been the primary prerequisite for state-sanctioned slaughter. From the forced starvation of 150,000 civilians at the Siege of Changchun
RSS