Interesting geopolitical times. And I think it is fair to say that many people, myself included, have long wanted the US out of "NATO", although that certainly raises questions about this organisation's raison d'être given that it is canonically stated as "keeping the Americans in, the Germans down, and the Russians out" (i.e., of Europe).
So whence NATO? Could it conceivably morph into a common European defence alliance? But then against whom would its members ally? Is it immediately obvious, for example, that Turkey doesn't present as much of a long-term threat to Europe as Russia, especially if it continues to advance in the form of a "Caliphate" into Greater Syria and the South Caucasus? But Turkey is not only a NATO member, but, assuming the exit of the USA, currently has by far its largest standing army.
Not being a naive pacifist (albeit strongly pro "Russkiy Mir"), it seems obvious to me that Europe cannot simply renege on providing its own defence. If it becomes any weaker than it already is, then it will certainly be taken over by an entity stronger than it. Of course, that entity was and still is America, but it is becoming painfully obvious that America doesn't really need Europe for anything, since the latter possesses few natural resources and increasingly flabby consumer markets, only really offering value-added luxury goods that are more of a threat than an opportunity for competing American manufacturers and designers.
Still, if Europe disappears completely down the tubes, it won't be good for the rest of the multipolar world. Indeed, if there is to be a multipolar world in the long term, it will have to take the reality of mutually assured destruction into account, only then becoming able to reciprocally negotiate its continuing existence on the basis of strategically sincere communication.
So the optimistic scenario would see NATO either disbanding entirely or morphing into a common European defence force, whose nuclear powers (Britain and France) would necessarily (in the absence of the USA) pool their forces under a unified command.
How would US reputation be destroyed if they didn’t run to aid Europe? Europe and the EU have for decades undermined US civil liberties and now because we are finally standing up to their liberal nonsense our reputation will somehow be damaged? I’m thinking we could give 2 shits about our reputation in that regard. The US has saved Europe’s ass on more than one occasion and this is the gratitude we get in return? The US is pivoting towards China as we should have done a very long time ago. It’s time Europe stands on its own and the Russia Russia Russia hysteria Europe is lying to their citizens about go through the masses as they see that Putin and Russia have no designs to invade and European country. This war has always been about Ukraine and only Ukraine.
I don't think any of this is going to happen, Andrew. At least, it won't finish happening. I think some EU country is going to have a real revolution and it's going to set off a chain reaction that will most definitely challenge Russian diplomatic skills, and I think it could happen soon, as in within the next few years.
Which country? I have no idea. Probably a place where no one expects it, like Belgium, but I can feel it coming. It may rhyme with 1848.
I think you are looking at it properly. Europe needs a wave of revolutions, similar to those that swept from Eastern Europe all the way to South America in 1848. They need to present and force their interests and that would be a Populist solution. The concept of the Nation-State has to be brought back and the present brand of Globalism flushed down the toilet. Russia started to walk down this road in 1991 and this is the main reason they are after her.
I do not believe they will get their U.S. umbrella, at least not under Trump. In my well considered opinion U.S./EU/NATO is in search to replace Ukraine like one is replacing a damaged tire on the roadside while driving toward the Gates of Hell. Ukraine is halfway depopulated, unwilling/unable to sacrifice more men and rightfully so. Out of the five states mentioned in the article: The three Baltic states are way too small to follow in Ukraine’s footsteps. Also, their population is too small. Poland is rather stable, united and cannot be overrun by the Soros Brigade to perform a death defying march toward the East. That leaves Romania. Romania is corrupted to the core just like Ukraine and extremely poor just like Ukraine. It has a large enough population to build a major army if financed by US/EU/NATO. The country is in an optimal geographic position to take Ukraine’s role. They were just manipulated into a legal black hole, sitting there on the edge of revolt, courtesy of U.S./EU/NATO, with an illegitimate government. They are simply ripe for their own version of a Maidan Revolution. Romania was also gifted by the largest US/NATO military airport that is under construction there at Mihail Kogălniceanu (a village). Trump just handed a giant contract to Boeing to mass produce the latest, best, most beautiful, stealthiest, etc. new manned fighter plane the F-47. This BS is introduced to the U.S. taxpayers every decade or so, with clockwork regularity to produce a new White Elephant that can fly in the sky but most certainly is NOT invisible.
Just like the decade long manipulations showed before 2022 that Ukraine will be herded to the slaughter house, so we have the writing on the wall now that the same fate is assigned to Romania.
When we consider the Baltic States their total population is around 6 million and out of that around 870,000 was counted as Russian at the 2023 census. This number was much higher in 1991. We can be assured that there are a substantial number of more Russians who are hiding in the gray area, unwilling to be counted in time of this conflict. The ethnic balance there closely resembles the same in Ukraine. If I was a politician in a Baltic State I would think 8 times before initiating hostile acts against the local Russians or Russia itself. It is true that these small countries were pushed toward extinction during the Stalin era but this should not be a reason for Lithuania to play the Kaliningrad transportation corridor game today. Their problem is that Russia will hang around on the long-run and they will have to coexist with it.
Only the US can provide Poland and the Baltics security without the risk of these countries being submerged in German dominated Mitteleuropa. This is one reason why US-Russian condominium can provide stability and peace for Europe - like during the Cold War. This is Trump's goal.
A non-nuclear Europe would be a protectorate of both the US and Russia. Gradual Germanification of Eastern and Central Europe can only result in conflict. Trump is saving Europe from itself.
But none of this can be possible without the non-nuclearization of Europe. To that end, Trump is going to block Macron's fantasies about extending a French nuclear umbrella over Poland (and the Baltics?). One thing to count on is that Trump will not under any circumstances allow nuclear proliferation in Europe since this would constitute the Mother of All Destabilizations.
Trump's ne plus ultra would be to extend de-nuclearization to the entire world.
Nobody will ask and nobody need ask, not as long as the EU holds the purse strings and these countries are dependent on EU transfers of one form or another.
Andrew, your analysis assumes that Trump's New Detente is only about Russia-US relations. I think Trump envisions the de-nuclearization of Europe as his ultimate goal. To comply with this, both the UK and France will have to renounce nuclear weapons in exchange for guaranties from both the US and Russia within a comprehensive Europe-wide security framework. This framework would be designed to be extensible to non-European nuclear powers.
When it comes to guarantees and nuclear weapons they are completely worthless. The Western Nations are suffering from the critical illness of a type of Democracy that cannot guarantee a truckload of toilet paper delivered on time after the next election.
Interesting geopolitical times. And I think it is fair to say that many people, myself included, have long wanted the US out of "NATO", although that certainly raises questions about this organisation's raison d'être given that it is canonically stated as "keeping the Americans in, the Germans down, and the Russians out" (i.e., of Europe).
So whence NATO? Could it conceivably morph into a common European defence alliance? But then against whom would its members ally? Is it immediately obvious, for example, that Turkey doesn't present as much of a long-term threat to Europe as Russia, especially if it continues to advance in the form of a "Caliphate" into Greater Syria and the South Caucasus? But Turkey is not only a NATO member, but, assuming the exit of the USA, currently has by far its largest standing army.
Not being a naive pacifist (albeit strongly pro "Russkiy Mir"), it seems obvious to me that Europe cannot simply renege on providing its own defence. If it becomes any weaker than it already is, then it will certainly be taken over by an entity stronger than it. Of course, that entity was and still is America, but it is becoming painfully obvious that America doesn't really need Europe for anything, since the latter possesses few natural resources and increasingly flabby consumer markets, only really offering value-added luxury goods that are more of a threat than an opportunity for competing American manufacturers and designers.
Still, if Europe disappears completely down the tubes, it won't be good for the rest of the multipolar world. Indeed, if there is to be a multipolar world in the long term, it will have to take the reality of mutually assured destruction into account, only then becoming able to reciprocally negotiate its continuing existence on the basis of strategically sincere communication.
So the optimistic scenario would see NATO either disbanding entirely or morphing into a common European defence force, whose nuclear powers (Britain and France) would necessarily (in the absence of the USA) pool their forces under a unified command.
How would US reputation be destroyed if they didn’t run to aid Europe? Europe and the EU have for decades undermined US civil liberties and now because we are finally standing up to their liberal nonsense our reputation will somehow be damaged? I’m thinking we could give 2 shits about our reputation in that regard. The US has saved Europe’s ass on more than one occasion and this is the gratitude we get in return? The US is pivoting towards China as we should have done a very long time ago. It’s time Europe stands on its own and the Russia Russia Russia hysteria Europe is lying to their citizens about go through the masses as they see that Putin and Russia have no designs to invade and European country. This war has always been about Ukraine and only Ukraine.
How did Europe "undermine US civil liberties" for decades?
France is already making moves into Romania's incoming presidential elections in May after the ones in December were annuled...
I don't think any of this is going to happen, Andrew. At least, it won't finish happening. I think some EU country is going to have a real revolution and it's going to set off a chain reaction that will most definitely challenge Russian diplomatic skills, and I think it could happen soon, as in within the next few years.
Which country? I have no idea. Probably a place where no one expects it, like Belgium, but I can feel it coming. It may rhyme with 1848.
I think you are looking at it properly. Europe needs a wave of revolutions, similar to those that swept from Eastern Europe all the way to South America in 1848. They need to present and force their interests and that would be a Populist solution. The concept of the Nation-State has to be brought back and the present brand of Globalism flushed down the toilet. Russia started to walk down this road in 1991 and this is the main reason they are after her.
That’s a really good point—nationalism must be crushed in order for globalism to prevail.
A decade ago I have seen aging Kissinger arguing the same in a polite version...
I do not believe they will get their U.S. umbrella, at least not under Trump. In my well considered opinion U.S./EU/NATO is in search to replace Ukraine like one is replacing a damaged tire on the roadside while driving toward the Gates of Hell. Ukraine is halfway depopulated, unwilling/unable to sacrifice more men and rightfully so. Out of the five states mentioned in the article: The three Baltic states are way too small to follow in Ukraine’s footsteps. Also, their population is too small. Poland is rather stable, united and cannot be overrun by the Soros Brigade to perform a death defying march toward the East. That leaves Romania. Romania is corrupted to the core just like Ukraine and extremely poor just like Ukraine. It has a large enough population to build a major army if financed by US/EU/NATO. The country is in an optimal geographic position to take Ukraine’s role. They were just manipulated into a legal black hole, sitting there on the edge of revolt, courtesy of U.S./EU/NATO, with an illegitimate government. They are simply ripe for their own version of a Maidan Revolution. Romania was also gifted by the largest US/NATO military airport that is under construction there at Mihail Kogălniceanu (a village). Trump just handed a giant contract to Boeing to mass produce the latest, best, most beautiful, stealthiest, etc. new manned fighter plane the F-47. This BS is introduced to the U.S. taxpayers every decade or so, with clockwork regularity to produce a new White Elephant that can fly in the sky but most certainly is NOT invisible.
Just like the decade long manipulations showed before 2022 that Ukraine will be herded to the slaughter house, so we have the writing on the wall now that the same fate is assigned to Romania.
When we consider the Baltic States their total population is around 6 million and out of that around 870,000 was counted as Russian at the 2023 census. This number was much higher in 1991. We can be assured that there are a substantial number of more Russians who are hiding in the gray area, unwilling to be counted in time of this conflict. The ethnic balance there closely resembles the same in Ukraine. If I was a politician in a Baltic State I would think 8 times before initiating hostile acts against the local Russians or Russia itself. It is true that these small countries were pushed toward extinction during the Stalin era but this should not be a reason for Lithuania to play the Kaliningrad transportation corridor game today. Their problem is that Russia will hang around on the long-run and they will have to coexist with it.
Only the US can provide Poland and the Baltics security without the risk of these countries being submerged in German dominated Mitteleuropa. This is one reason why US-Russian condominium can provide stability and peace for Europe - like during the Cold War. This is Trump's goal.
A non-nuclear Europe would be a protectorate of both the US and Russia. Gradual Germanification of Eastern and Central Europe can only result in conflict. Trump is saving Europe from itself.
But none of this can be possible without the non-nuclearization of Europe. To that end, Trump is going to block Macron's fantasies about extending a French nuclear umbrella over Poland (and the Baltics?). One thing to count on is that Trump will not under any circumstances allow nuclear proliferation in Europe since this would constitute the Mother of All Destabilizations.
Trump's ne plus ultra would be to extend de-nuclearization to the entire world.
Nobody will ask and nobody need ask, not as long as the EU holds the purse strings and these countries are dependent on EU transfers of one form or another.
Andrew, your analysis assumes that Trump's New Detente is only about Russia-US relations. I think Trump envisions the de-nuclearization of Europe as his ultimate goal. To comply with this, both the UK and France will have to renounce nuclear weapons in exchange for guaranties from both the US and Russia within a comprehensive Europe-wide security framework. This framework would be designed to be extensible to non-European nuclear powers.
When it comes to guarantees and nuclear weapons they are completely worthless. The Western Nations are suffering from the critical illness of a type of Democracy that cannot guarantee a truckload of toilet paper delivered on time after the next election.