When Dwight Eisenhower took command of NATO in the early 1950s, he said at the time (to paraphrase) that if the U.S. still had military forces in Europe in ten years (the early 1960s) then NATO will have failed in its mission.
If the objective of NATO was to keep the peace in Europe, then NATO has been a dismal failure.
The expansion of NATO into eastern Europe is the primary cause of the current war. History would have turned out much differently had NATO stood down and been disbanded when the Warsaw Pact was dissolved. But that would have upset too many rice bowls, so here we are.
How would the USA behave if Mexico signed a mutual defense treaty with the PRC, followed by China pouring weapons and advisors into our southern neighbor. We would do to Mexico what we did to Iraq back in 2003; we would destroy the country. We were preparing to destroy Cuba during the Missile Crisis in 1962.
So Russia is behaving much as the USA would behave if we were in their position.
The road to a negotiated peace in this current war looks like a bridge too far insofar as I am concerned.
It is really fascinating to watch how the Euro elites and their media allies respond to people noticing the Islamification of Europe.
It isn't happening, but we don't have the data to know because of privacy laws, but if it was happening it would be good, but it isn't, and anyway the whole subject is racist so we mustn't discuss it.
Muslims migrating to Europe are a mix of Sub-Saharans, North Africans, West Asians and South Asians. It's not really race, but common inherited culture and religion. However, "racism" sounds better to Lefty ears.
Sharp analysis. The irony here is that Starmer, Macron and Merz probably thought they were boxing Trump in, but they actualy freed him to pursue stragetic stability with Russia without worrying about Eurpean pushback. When you undermine someones negotiating leverage, dunno why they'd feel obligated to keep trying.
Zelensky is between a rock and a hard place. He is going to have to choose between Ukrainian hard liners and reality on the ground. All the UK, France, and Germany will do accomplish with direct intervention is start WWIII. Then they will expect the US to come rescue them again. Trump needs to walk away.
The territory is worthless once Ukraine gets a security guarantee. So Putin’s goal isn’t to capture worthless territory with elderly to feed and warm…his goal is removing Zelensky and installing a puppet. Trump could end the war tomorrow if he said Putin gets all of the disputed territory but if he crosses the new border then America will retaliate which would then be a war between two nuclear powers which is WW3.
I just heard Brett McGurk tell CNN that 'Russia has not been able to take the Kramatorsk fortress belt in 4 years, and cannot do so in another 4 years, so any discussion of ceding the Donbas is wrong'.
Delusional, given the frontline dynamic from Pokrovsk through Kostiantinivka and Siversk to Lyman, so why does he make the claim?
I guess like Big-War-funded ISW (Lockheed, Raytheon, DynaCorp &c) led by Vicky Nuland's sister-in-law, like Yermak till the CIA removed him, like Zelensky, he thinks endless war is somehow profits him personally, and his sponsors.
Pity nobody much, except perhaps Trump on occasion, actually thinks about the Ukrainians.
Except half of them want to keep fighting a losing battle because as Trump says, they really, really hate their Russian brothers.
Family feuds are the worst.
And this dumb war is crazy, except for the profiteers.
Trump and Witkoff are certainly eager to enrich themselves, as is evidenced by the recent “28-Point Peace Plan” Dimitriev tried to foist on Ukraine. Trump and Witkoff stood to profit handsomely.
Well written, Stephen. I have to agree with you one hundred percent on this. The demise of NATO is imminent and will solve a lot of problems for both the USA and Russia.
Restoring relations between Russia and the US doesn't mean much. There isn't much trade between them. Most important is arms control, and cooperation in space programs. Maybe an opportunity for mining rare earth so the US is less dependent on China, but I'm not sure if Russia and, China will give up this strategic advantage.
The US paying for EU security is questionable. First NATO is the military arm of the US hegemony, so who profits the most of it? Does the US occupation and NATO expansion brings more safety or more risk? I don't mind if all US troops leave Europe, it might increase European security.
Spending 5% of GDP is stupidity for two reasons in my eyes. If you would a private job you must create a strategic plan with your goals and then see how to achieve this and how much it cost. Just spending billions without a clear strategic goal will end in a bloated dysfunctional army. That's like me saying I will spend 10% of my income on gasoline so that I'll be driving half of my free time in circles because I need to spend gasoline.
In reality 5% is a lot more. Western economies are mostly a service economy, it adds no value. Without an industrial base that actual creates wealth this 5% will take 10% or more wealth out of the economy. The same reason why the EU doesn't understand how Russia with a much lower GDP outproduces the EU. The real EU economy is much smaller, they don't grow the pie, they just cut it in more pieces, only debt can keep the illusion of wealth. Isn't military spending not the final phase of a failing empire? The war can only end on the battlefield. If you love the US make sure Trump gets out of NATO article 5.
Western economy has a bigger industrial component that USA, particularly Germany. However, that industry is currently collapsing. Services generate value, otherwise you wouldn't pay for them. Come on, nurseries are services, hospitals are services, schools and universities are services. And on on...
They even play a large role in trade - look at US film industry, or US financial industry, or US social media industry - all of this are services.
By your logic, where does the West draw the line? Does it matter if Putin swallows the rest of Ukraine? And by the same (your) logic, should the US just stand by if and when the CCP makes it move on Taiwan? Again, where does our strategic interest lie and does principle play any role at all?
By your logic, US taxpayers should pledge bodies and treasure to prop up a corrupt country in Eastern Europe to allow Europe to keep going anti western
Wrong! Don't put words in my mouth! I did not advocate any position. Clearly, you have reading challenges (maybe thinking too). My questions are focused on policy. Too many errors have been made for lack of clarity of thought and policy. I guess this all above your head.
Trump's not sinking NATO, he's saving America from freeloading Europeans who won't pay their 2% dues.
If Putin gobbles Ukraine, it's Europe's mess to clean up. We've bled trillions propping up their backyard brawl. In regards to Taiwan, that's a real red line with teeth ~ strategic Pacific dominance, not optional charity. Principle means America First, bodies and bucks for threats to US soil, not endless Euro bailouts.
The US officially recognises Taiwan as being part of China. This key tenent forms part of its "One China policy". The semi-constant sabre rattling over Taiwan is therefore curious to say the least. As for Ukraine, whatever is left will be carved up by American and European venture capitalists and then sold to the highest bidder.
We have no major national interests in Ukraine. It could be swallowed by a giant sinkhole without causing us any serious trouble. We have major national interests in Taiwan. They supply most of our computer chips.
Are the European elites going for one last try to finally wipe the continent away of the troublesome European peasants? To be replaced by more controllable "others"? '
The problem for the Europeans is that they are broke. If the US walks away their only option is the Russian funds stored in European banks. However, if they grab this then legally, they are in for a world of hurt. The Russians have already written off this money, and their economy has amply replaced this loss. They will then sue the pants off the Europeans and are very likely to win.
The other issue if the Europeans grab the Russian money is the reputational damage as the Global South will withdraw their money from Europe as an unreliable investment. This the Europeans can ill-afford.
Tusk announced the "compulsory military training" plan back in March. Per usual with anything that Polish politicians say, it was a hyperbole wrapped in a pie in the sky. The program watered down to "military training opened to all adults who choose to participate". To gin up the numbers, training duration could be as short as one day. Still, more than half the people who signed up through a web-page failed to show up.
If the highly charged and polarised domestic US political environment continues Republicans might well lose the presidency in 2028 and the most likely president would be arch woke Gavin Newsom. In the west people vote for ideological purity rather than national economic or material interests - countries are multicultural and multifaith and there are typically no unified national interests other than those of billionaire monopolies, banks and the war industry. Ideology is just secular or gnostic religion. In the mid terms Trump could become lame duck with an extremely ideologicaly hostile Senate and House. This along with a Newsom presidency could mean a return to war and Nato expansion with US actually leading Nato to war scenario real instead of US safeguarding its own interests. So if an agreement is reached with Russia - it is for how long? Two years? British PMs are mind controlled from childhood to be automatons of the livery companies in the City of London which still control a highly financialised global British Empire through structures like Order of the British Empire member billionaires from Americas to Asia to Africa who launder and deposit their surplus with the Crown bankers - good example here in Hong Kong' the quarter to quarter rent inflator and money launderer for the Crown Li Ka Shing who has made HK realty a ponzi scheme that pays forever for the Crown with China taking slow and patient approach with him . A Starmer or Johnson have no agency. We know that Sunak (probably because he is Indian) hadn't undergone the same grooming and refused to be a war PM for which the Tories had to be taken down.
Don't know how the US midterms will play out but IMO the Ukrainian military will collapse completely well before then, most likely during the Russian winter offensive. They've run out of manpower and the EU's paper tiger militaires are powerless to prevent the collapse and Trump will walk away from Europe's idiotic posturing.
Why?? America has spent $2 trillion this century preparing for a war with Russia and if they win this war then we will have to spend another several trillion preparing for a war when they have tens of millions more soldiers to sacrifice. Republican senators aren’t going to allow Trump to surrender like he did in Afghanistan because they actually care about Ukrainians.
US needs neutral Russia if it wants to check China. At the moment, Chinese money (or profits of China trade, which is more or less the same thing) is flowing to D. Because the D-inspired policy leads to US decay. China is rubbing its hands that US has invested 2 Trill $ in fighting Russia, lol.
No, our most important ally is Qatar and we don’t need Russia for anything. And the notion one can manipulate Putin and Xi to act in our interests is the reason we ended up so dependent on China in 2020. China and Russia will always do what is in their respective best interests and the notion they will work together defies history. Ultimately China only wants grains and energy from a trading partner which is why Putin invaded Ukraine because he wants to partner for value added exports and he knows that’s not China in 10 years when they will have developed every industry for their own.
Sure, the way MSM are totally supporting the D opposition shows that there is a huge thumb on the political scale. If one wants to change it, one would need government money to be given in tons to every elected official, so that they can set up a more balanced media.
'NATO exists to confront the problems caused by its existence'
Prof Richard Sakwa, 2014
When Dwight Eisenhower took command of NATO in the early 1950s, he said at the time (to paraphrase) that if the U.S. still had military forces in Europe in ten years (the early 1960s) then NATO will have failed in its mission.
If the objective of NATO was to keep the peace in Europe, then NATO has been a dismal failure.
The expansion of NATO into eastern Europe is the primary cause of the current war. History would have turned out much differently had NATO stood down and been disbanded when the Warsaw Pact was dissolved. But that would have upset too many rice bowls, so here we are.
How would the USA behave if Mexico signed a mutual defense treaty with the PRC, followed by China pouring weapons and advisors into our southern neighbor. We would do to Mexico what we did to Iraq back in 2003; we would destroy the country. We were preparing to destroy Cuba during the Missile Crisis in 1962.
So Russia is behaving much as the USA would behave if we were in their position.
The road to a negotiated peace in this current war looks like a bridge too far insofar as I am concerned.
It is really fascinating to watch how the Euro elites and their media allies respond to people noticing the Islamification of Europe.
It isn't happening, but we don't have the data to know because of privacy laws, but if it was happening it would be good, but it isn't, and anyway the whole subject is racist so we mustn't discuss it.
Muslims migrating to Europe are a mix of Sub-Saharans, North Africans, West Asians and South Asians. It's not really race, but common inherited culture and religion. However, "racism" sounds better to Lefty ears.
Criminy. Doesn’t Z have enough skim yet? I guess he wants mo money mo money mo money to completely have Ukraine destroyed.
Sharp analysis. The irony here is that Starmer, Macron and Merz probably thought they were boxing Trump in, but they actualy freed him to pursue stragetic stability with Russia without worrying about Eurpean pushback. When you undermine someones negotiating leverage, dunno why they'd feel obligated to keep trying.
Zelensky is between a rock and a hard place. He is going to have to choose between Ukrainian hard liners and reality on the ground. All the UK, France, and Germany will do accomplish with direct intervention is start WWIII. Then they will expect the US to come rescue them again. Trump needs to walk away.
The territory is worthless once Ukraine gets a security guarantee. So Putin’s goal isn’t to capture worthless territory with elderly to feed and warm…his goal is removing Zelensky and installing a puppet. Trump could end the war tomorrow if he said Putin gets all of the disputed territory but if he crosses the new border then America will retaliate which would then be a war between two nuclear powers which is WW3.
I just heard Brett McGurk tell CNN that 'Russia has not been able to take the Kramatorsk fortress belt in 4 years, and cannot do so in another 4 years, so any discussion of ceding the Donbas is wrong'.
Delusional, given the frontline dynamic from Pokrovsk through Kostiantinivka and Siversk to Lyman, so why does he make the claim?
I guess like Big-War-funded ISW (Lockheed, Raytheon, DynaCorp &c) led by Vicky Nuland's sister-in-law, like Yermak till the CIA removed him, like Zelensky, he thinks endless war is somehow profits him personally, and his sponsors.
Pity nobody much, except perhaps Trump on occasion, actually thinks about the Ukrainians.
Except half of them want to keep fighting a losing battle because as Trump says, they really, really hate their Russian brothers.
Family feuds are the worst.
And this dumb war is crazy, except for the profiteers.
Trump and Witkoff are certainly eager to enrich themselves, as is evidenced by the recent “28-Point Peace Plan” Dimitriev tried to foist on Ukraine. Trump and Witkoff stood to profit handsomely.
Completely delusional, yes. Ukraine is slow-motion collapsing. The only choice USA now has is either a hostile Big Russia, or a neutral Big Russia.
Well written, Stephen. I have to agree with you one hundred percent on this. The demise of NATO is imminent and will solve a lot of problems for both the USA and Russia.
Restoring relations between Russia and the US doesn't mean much. There isn't much trade between them. Most important is arms control, and cooperation in space programs. Maybe an opportunity for mining rare earth so the US is less dependent on China, but I'm not sure if Russia and, China will give up this strategic advantage.
The US paying for EU security is questionable. First NATO is the military arm of the US hegemony, so who profits the most of it? Does the US occupation and NATO expansion brings more safety or more risk? I don't mind if all US troops leave Europe, it might increase European security.
Spending 5% of GDP is stupidity for two reasons in my eyes. If you would a private job you must create a strategic plan with your goals and then see how to achieve this and how much it cost. Just spending billions without a clear strategic goal will end in a bloated dysfunctional army. That's like me saying I will spend 10% of my income on gasoline so that I'll be driving half of my free time in circles because I need to spend gasoline.
In reality 5% is a lot more. Western economies are mostly a service economy, it adds no value. Without an industrial base that actual creates wealth this 5% will take 10% or more wealth out of the economy. The same reason why the EU doesn't understand how Russia with a much lower GDP outproduces the EU. The real EU economy is much smaller, they don't grow the pie, they just cut it in more pieces, only debt can keep the illusion of wealth. Isn't military spending not the final phase of a failing empire? The war can only end on the battlefield. If you love the US make sure Trump gets out of NATO article 5.
Western economy has a bigger industrial component that USA, particularly Germany. However, that industry is currently collapsing. Services generate value, otherwise you wouldn't pay for them. Come on, nurseries are services, hospitals are services, schools and universities are services. And on on...
They even play a large role in trade - look at US film industry, or US financial industry, or US social media industry - all of this are services.
By your logic, where does the West draw the line? Does it matter if Putin swallows the rest of Ukraine? And by the same (your) logic, should the US just stand by if and when the CCP makes it move on Taiwan? Again, where does our strategic interest lie and does principle play any role at all?
By your logic, US taxpayers should pledge bodies and treasure to prop up a corrupt country in Eastern Europe to allow Europe to keep going anti western
Wrong! Don't put words in my mouth! I did not advocate any position. Clearly, you have reading challenges (maybe thinking too). My questions are focused on policy. Too many errors have been made for lack of clarity of thought and policy. I guess this all above your head.
Ah. Touched a major nerve I see.
And the policy to date has basically been let uncle sugar pay. But then, in your rage of being outed, you fail to see that.
You have a blessed day.
He wrote nothing of the sort. Being called out on your red herring touched your lying nerves.
Trump's not sinking NATO, he's saving America from freeloading Europeans who won't pay their 2% dues.
If Putin gobbles Ukraine, it's Europe's mess to clean up. We've bled trillions propping up their backyard brawl. In regards to Taiwan, that's a real red line with teeth ~ strategic Pacific dominance, not optional charity. Principle means America First, bodies and bucks for threats to US soil, not endless Euro bailouts.
The US officially recognises Taiwan as being part of China. This key tenent forms part of its "One China policy". The semi-constant sabre rattling over Taiwan is therefore curious to say the least. As for Ukraine, whatever is left will be carved up by American and European venture capitalists and then sold to the highest bidder.
We have no major national interests in Ukraine. It could be swallowed by a giant sinkhole without causing us any serious trouble. We have major national interests in Taiwan. They supply most of our computer chips.
Are the European elites going for one last try to finally wipe the continent away of the troublesome European peasants? To be replaced by more controllable "others"? '
Likely. Although the “others” aren’t controllable.
Oh yes they are. The system chooses not to at the moment.
A great article. NATO & Zelensky need to be sunk.
Your boy, Putin, could end it tomorrow.
The problem for the Europeans is that they are broke. If the US walks away their only option is the Russian funds stored in European banks. However, if they grab this then legally, they are in for a world of hurt. The Russians have already written off this money, and their economy has amply replaced this loss. They will then sue the pants off the Europeans and are very likely to win.
The other issue if the Europeans grab the Russian money is the reputational damage as the Global South will withdraw their money from Europe as an unreliable investment. This the Europeans can ill-afford.
Tusk announced the "compulsory military training" plan back in March. Per usual with anything that Polish politicians say, it was a hyperbole wrapped in a pie in the sky. The program watered down to "military training opened to all adults who choose to participate". To gin up the numbers, training duration could be as short as one day. Still, more than half the people who signed up through a web-page failed to show up.
If the highly charged and polarised domestic US political environment continues Republicans might well lose the presidency in 2028 and the most likely president would be arch woke Gavin Newsom. In the west people vote for ideological purity rather than national economic or material interests - countries are multicultural and multifaith and there are typically no unified national interests other than those of billionaire monopolies, banks and the war industry. Ideology is just secular or gnostic religion. In the mid terms Trump could become lame duck with an extremely ideologicaly hostile Senate and House. This along with a Newsom presidency could mean a return to war and Nato expansion with US actually leading Nato to war scenario real instead of US safeguarding its own interests. So if an agreement is reached with Russia - it is for how long? Two years? British PMs are mind controlled from childhood to be automatons of the livery companies in the City of London which still control a highly financialised global British Empire through structures like Order of the British Empire member billionaires from Americas to Asia to Africa who launder and deposit their surplus with the Crown bankers - good example here in Hong Kong' the quarter to quarter rent inflator and money launderer for the Crown Li Ka Shing who has made HK realty a ponzi scheme that pays forever for the Crown with China taking slow and patient approach with him . A Starmer or Johnson have no agency. We know that Sunak (probably because he is Indian) hadn't undergone the same grooming and refused to be a war PM for which the Tories had to be taken down.
Don't know how the US midterms will play out but IMO the Ukrainian military will collapse completely well before then, most likely during the Russian winter offensive. They've run out of manpower and the EU's paper tiger militaires are powerless to prevent the collapse and Trump will walk away from Europe's idiotic posturing.
Dick Minnis removingthecataract.substack.com
Been saying “it will be over soon!”
since 2022
Why?? America has spent $2 trillion this century preparing for a war with Russia and if they win this war then we will have to spend another several trillion preparing for a war when they have tens of millions more soldiers to sacrifice. Republican senators aren’t going to allow Trump to surrender like he did in Afghanistan because they actually care about Ukrainians.
US needs neutral Russia if it wants to check China. At the moment, Chinese money (or profits of China trade, which is more or less the same thing) is flowing to D. Because the D-inspired policy leads to US decay. China is rubbing its hands that US has invested 2 Trill $ in fighting Russia, lol.
No, our most important ally is Qatar and we don’t need Russia for anything. And the notion one can manipulate Putin and Xi to act in our interests is the reason we ended up so dependent on China in 2020. China and Russia will always do what is in their respective best interests and the notion they will work together defies history. Ultimately China only wants grains and energy from a trading partner which is why Putin invaded Ukraine because he wants to partner for value added exports and he knows that’s not China in 10 years when they will have developed every industry for their own.
Sure, the way MSM are totally supporting the D opposition shows that there is a huge thumb on the political scale. If one wants to change it, one would need government money to be given in tons to every elected official, so that they can set up a more balanced media.
A large % of the French Z population in age for conscription is Muslim. I doubt they would happily fight and die for Zionist Zelensky...