The report is absolutely scathing. Some choice quotes:
But when the next crisis came, both the US and the governments of Europe fell back on old models of alliance leadership. Europe, as EU high representative for foreign affairs Josep Borrell loudly lamented prior to Russia’s invasion, is not really at the table when it comes to dealing with the Russia-Ukraine crisis. It has instead embarked on a process of vassalisation.
But “alone” had a very specific meaning for Scholz. He was unwilling to send Leopard 2 tanks to Ukraine unless the US also sent its own main battle tank, the M1 Abrams. It was not enough that other partners would send tanks or that the US might send other weapons. Like a scared child in a room full of strangers, Germany felt alone if Uncle Sam was not holding its hand.
Europeans’ lack of agency in the Russia-Ukraine crisis stems from this growing power imbalance in the Western alliance. Under the Biden administration, the US has become ever more willing to exercise this growing influence.
Like a scared child in a room full of strangers, Germany felt alone if Uncle Sam was not holding its hand.
From another angle Germany twisted the US’ arm until they did what we wanted them to do. Atlanticism in Germany is right-wing, the SPD certainly has its faults but worshipping the US is not one of them.
The nations of Europe are not currently capable to defend themselves and so they have no choice but to rely on the US in a crisis
Against who? Aliens? Who is this hypothetical enemy that can invade Europe? Capabilities aren’t exactly as they should be, it would be nasty going against a rogue US, yes, but we could still bring the whole thing to a stalemate even if it would necessitate a couple of French nukes getting dropped on carrier groups.
…and don’t get me started on them wanking off to the dollar value of US contributions. Much of what they send should be valued negatively (in monetary terms) because it’s surplus and they’re saving on disposal costs. Meanwhile, if the EU had the US’ ammunition production capacity Ukraine would’ve run out by now.
The US has been pussy-footing around this whole conflict, see e.g. the row about ATACMs, the UK had to send Storm Shadow (which they don’t exactly have a surplus of, to the contrary) to twist the US’ arm.
What many analysts don’t seem to get into their head, it just doesn’t fit their framework, is that Europe as a whole is a lot more “hawkish” in this conflict than the US, leading to all kinds of misinterpretations. “But Europe is so peace-loving and warm and fuzzy” – no, motherfucker, we hate imperialism. That’s all there is to it. We have plenty of former Russian colonies in the union and with shit going down as it went, the western members finally understood that no, Russia can’t be reasoned with, or even be counted on to act in self-interest, instead of chalking the eastern member’s attitude up to PTSD.
From another angle Germany twisted the US’ arm until they did what we wanted them to do. Atlanticism in Germany is right-wing, the SPD certainly has its faults but worshipping the US is not one of them.
The top EU think tank very clearly disagrees with you here. It’s also pretty clear that Germany ended up being the big loser here given that it’s now in a recession. So, I guess if that’s what Germany wanted then it certainly did a brilliant job twisting US’ arm to destroy German industry. Given that this has been the stated goal of US for years now, I don’t think much twisting required here.
Against who? Aliens?
Europe wouldn’t have anyone to defend itself against if it didn’t keep creating enemies for itself. It was entirely possible to dismantle NATO after USSR collapsed and integrate Russia into Europe as an equal. Instead, Europe chose to have an antagonistic relationship with Russia, and now Europe finds itself in a protection racket situation.
Finally, the idea that Europe could fight US or Russia in an all out war is completely delusional. Europe lacks the industrial base to do this kind of warfare, and it also lacks access to energy. Meanwhile, if we’re talking about nukes both US and Russia have literally an order of magnitude more nukes than all of Europe combined.
So, I guess if that’s what Germany wanted then it certainly did a brilliant job twisting US’ arm to destroy German industry.
The fuck have Abrams anything to do with Germany’s industry? How is that in any way connected? Are you simply making up slogans?
Instead, Europe chose to have an antagonistic relationship with Russia
Oh my fucking sides. Заткнись ватник блядь.
The fuck have Abrams anything to do with Germany’s industry? How is that in any way connected? Are you simply making up slogans?
I’m talking about the result of Germany being cut off from cheap energy and US blowing up German pipelines without Germany making any protest. Meanwhile, haven’t seen any Abrams anywhere close to Ukraine, but plenty of Leopards burning there now.
Oh my fucking sides. Заткнись ватник блядь.
I see you have difficulties engaging with reality.
I mean yeah, when a bunch of industry shuts down and your country goes into a recession, demand for gas drops which leads to lower prices. 😂
Yeah, sure. Consumption totally plummeted. Nothing is running any more, BASF Ludwigshafen is an industrial ruin. In case you didn’t notice our industry didn’t shut down, big consumers – like BASF – switched to alternative sources and now are kinda biting themselves in the ass because they’re paying more, now that gas prices are low again.
That makes things more expensive right now. In addition the ECB continues to set quite high interest rates to battle inflation, both together stifle internal consumption, people are eating less Aspargus. And we’re talking about what 0.2% reduction over the whole of 2023, 2014 is projected to have an increase of 1.5%. Both Ifo and DIW agree on that one. The trend for the rest of the year is already positive, the projected -0.2% means that we won’t be able to completely make up for the bad start of the year by the end of the year.
Also, this “Germany is in a recession” talk is technical. The usual definition of “two years of negative growth” is barely met, and usually doesn’t include your neighbour two doors down the street shooting themselves in the head, causing a scene. (One door if you count Kaliningrad, I know).
You’re right, everything is going great. We’ll just see where you are by next year.
Nothing can fight the US, it’s like the richest country and half the budget goes to the military. Russia would not be much of a threat though, especially now. Also the only country dependant on Russia was Germany and now that isn’t the case so I’m not sure what you mean by “lacks access to energy”.
Nothing can fight the US, it’s like the richest country and half the budget goes to the military.
About 50% of the United State’s discretionary federal budget is spent on defense on average. Discretionary spending is in contrast to Mandatory spending which covers legally mandated programs such as Social Security and Medicare.
In FY2022, the discretionary budget was $1.7 trillion, of which $751 billion was for defense. The mandatory budget was $4.1 trillion, and the total federal budget was $6.3 trillion. In FY2022, defense represented 11.9% of the total federal budget. An equivalent amount was spent on Medicare in the same year ($747 billion).
The United States spends roughly the same amount (in US$) on defense as the next 9 countries combined. This represents 3.4% of the US GDP. By percentage of GDP, the US ranks 14th in the world, lower than (for instance) Pakistan, Azerbaijan, Lebanon, and Russia.
The US is the richest country by GDP comparison, but this idea that it spends half its annual budget on the military is false - the real amount is about 13% on average. Social program spending far outweighs military spending in the US.
I like your fancy numbers magic man
@FluffyPotato Unless nukes are involved. Then it won’t matter how much we spend on the military.
I’d be surprised if local gopniks hadn’t sold off Russia’s nukes for cheap vodka at this point and Russia is too embarrassed to admit it. Also Poland alone would occupy Russia with the sheer power of angry polish man the moment they announce they got no nukes.
lol
Yeah, but a lot of it comes from Europe not choosing to lead on any international crisis, to the point where it has intentionally designed its defense to require the US to participate.
I look at it like this, the EU should have its own independent military from NATO given its size and wealth. Yet, it chooses to be entirely dependent on NATO and needs the US to help in any sort of projection of force.
Which is a huge misunderstanding of how Europe works. It’s not federal like the US and would require all countries to agree to a centralised army. Many countries are rightly concerned about the concept and what it would mean for their own sovereign armed forces so won’t approve the idea.
Or it is federal in the same way the Holy Roman Empire was.
And the concern that European politicians seem to have is that an EU army would require the EU to define military policy rather than just follow US military policy. It isn’t that the EU couldn’t be made to gain greater competencies in military and diplomatic areas, it is that the various EU nations are happier letting the US define that instead.
What are you talking about? Every country in Europe already has its own military and the EU has a defensive clause it the pact.
Every country in Europe already has its own military
And each American state has its own military as well that is controlled by the different governors.
and the EU has a defensive clause it the pact
And the base for that defense pact is NATO headquarters. This is also only defense only, which makes cases where the EU needs to respond to threats on its frontier difficult because there is no organizing entity to handle this issue. And if the defense pact was the reason for inter-EU defense, it is going to be through the lens of NATO, which gives the US a pretty big say on EU defense.
It really is a matter of European countries keeping to the defense spending requirements they have already committed to under NATO. A lot of Europeans I talk to claim that it is wasteful, and that money is better spent on foreign aide. But meanwhile, the US still foots the bill for their defense. This is an intense able situation - the US cannot put the entire world on ots back. Multilaterlaism has to mean cooperation from the rest of the world to ensure safety.
But it is more than that. A lot of EU nations don’t have a military of a size capable of more than just basic infantry. This has been a problem for NATO as the US has created a lot of the logistics and specialty platforms required to fight a modern war that a lot of other nations don’t pay into.
The EU is already seeing the merging of several military units because it is cheaper to develop them at scale. At that point, why not just have all of the EU create and manage the joint arms at a level where it makes more sense?
Becoming a vassal of the US is the direct consequences of that choice.
That’s a lot of words just to say “Germany hesitated about sending tanks to Ukraine therefore the US is now the colonial master of Europe.”
Apparently that’s all it takes. Just a slight hesitation on a decision and you lose all sovereignty forever.
Or maybe the hesitation over the tanks was a little disappointing, but not really that big a deal. Calm down people.
😂
And yet countries, given free choice, came running to NATO. Curious 🤔
given free choice
I don’t remember any referendum to join NATO here.
When was there a time when Poland became a democracy where a referendum to join NATO would not have passed?
I don’t know, nobody ever asked, that’s my point.
And my point is that a referendum would very likely be pro NATO. You’re arguing as if there is this large anti-NATO group in Poland. Hell, Poland even participated in the invasion and occupation of Iraq. Poland didn’t need to; the country could have stuck to Afghanistan only.
So did Russia
Again we really dont know, nobody asked. Have you never wondered why they didn’t asked?
And btw. those wars were very unpopular in Poland and also their legality was, lightly said, dubious.
Have you never wondered why they didn’t asked?
Most referendums are done as a way to let politicians not have to take ownership of policies that may hurt themselves. Brexit pushed Britain’s membership off of the sitting PM, but it has also been used for marijuana legalization and the passage of new taxes in conservative states where the legislature can’t be seen to raise taxes. Poland joining NATO was never unpopular enough to force politicians to have to push joining to the public the same way that EU treaties are unpopular enough that several nations are forced to require a vote to approve EU treaties.
And btw. those wars were very unpopular in Poland
And has a party fallen from that? I know the legality is dubious, but were there actual consequences from participating?
We did had referendum for EU which was massively popular (75% voted “for”) but still there was serious fear that the frequention would make it invalid. It didn’t ultimately, 58% went to vote, but Poland generally have very low election participations because our political class is just like the USA, various wings of the neoliberal party. Which make this arguments of yours invalid. They didn’t asked about NATO because they feared it would fail, while joining the US empire was mandatory.
And has a party fallen from that? I know the legality is dubious, but were there actual consequences from participating?
Of course not, it was uniform across all the wings of our neoliberal party, that’s how you can recognize it’s effectively just one party and the country is just an undemocratic vassal of USA since it can ignore its own law and nothing happens. Non govt circles pointed that out of course, only to be ignored. But the political opposition (another very telling symptom which happens all the time in Poland!) didn’t say anything - the original invaders was the socialdemocratic party, but then both liberals and conservatives supported it after both parties won the election. Which is yet another interesting thing - back then every major party got to rule in very short time one after another - when the voters seeked for any alternative - and never found it since their policies are nearly the same.
Now, now, let’s not let facts get in the face of the narrative here.
We will see how it plays out long term, but it seems to me that the US is hollowing out Europe to enrich themselves in their economic war against China
I think that’s precisely what’s happening, the amazing part is how many Europeans refuse to acknowledge it because they painted themselves into a situation where they’re entirely reliant on US for protection now.
I’m unsubscribing from this community. There are plenty of better world news communities on other instances. You seem to be a prolific poster on this community and I strongly disagree with everything you say and post.
Bye!
