The Brits and the EU are desperate to maintain the appearance of relevance in the Ukraine matter. However the sheer speed with which Trump moved to sideline them leaves them looking like fish flopping around on dry land.
It doesn't surprise me in the least that Trump has done this. Other than a few exceptions like Hungary and Slovakia, European leaders have been openly hostile to him. Starmer, the British labour leader, actually sent political operatives to campaign for Kamala Harris, Trump's opponent! Though he might have felt that way regardless, Mr. Trump surely feels he owes Europe nothing.
This is stark realpolitik occurring right before our eyes. It appears to be nothing less than a global realignment. Things like that don't happen every day, and even less do they happen without a major war. I'd judge that we're witnessing a once in a century geopolitical event.
Say what you like about Donald Trump, he is a catalyst for change. Given the direction the world was heading over the last 25 years, that can only be welcomed by sensible people. However with each move by Trump I become increasingly concerned for his personal safety. He is shaking up branch, trunk and root. He already had many enemies, and he's likely to have even more now.
Poor Ukraine. They must feel like a used condom that was thrown into a dumpster. No NATO membership and no EU membership, but a destroyed infrastructure, a traumatized society and the lowest birthrate and a collapsing economy. I hope other nations will see what this was truly about, weakening Russia with the aim of regime change in Moscow. The only ones laughing are the US. They played everyone, Ukraine, Russia and Europe and soon they will be off to the next country they can exploit for their evil goals.
"The only ones laughing are the US. They played everyone." Regarding Ukraine, this lies solely at the feet of the Biden administration. My hope is that those days are gone and the US can become an outwardly peaceful nation (no more wars). I am a retired US veteran who served 20 years for our nation. I have been saddened in recent years by our behavior in global affairs.
It was actually the Neocons, Nuland in particular (working on Eastern Europe at State since the 1990s) that gave us the Ukraine mess (and so many other costly, lethal disasters).
They don't care about domestic US politics much, switching from Bush Jr (Nuland was Cheney's foreign policy advisor) to Killary at State, then Biden, but only the power to implement their own agenda.
They only cared, and still care, about their crazy Manicheaen ideology of Good (Us) v Evil (Them).
I call myself a Progressive Realist.
I have different ends and values than Conservative Realists, but stand with them, including Trump and most of his team, against the crazy warmongering Neocons, whatever colour they choose, Red or Blue.
I respectfully disagree. Ukraine was Biden's war. He was itching for it. To the point that he directed an embarrassing retreat in Afghanistan. Sure, Nuland and crowd were advising, but the buck stops with Biden.
It started with Georgia that also borders on Black Sea, in 2008. Bush & Obama. Of course, Kosovo 1999 was already a major provocation that resulted in Putin succeeding Yeltsin.
The conflict started long before the war, but I'm not aware of armed clashes between AFU and the Russian military or even separatist militia before 2014.
In a sense the conflict started when 94% of Crimeams voted for renewed autonomy in 1991, only to be overruled by Kiev the following year.
"The only ones laughing are the US" - nobody is laughing in the US. The "normal ones" are not laughing because they see how overextended the US got military & economically, and is perched on the precipice of the abyss. And the "abnormal ones" are not laughing because their gig in Ukraine is up, and for the elites, the day of reckoning might come.
When you say “poor Ukraine” who are you speaking for about? Zelenskyy and his cronies? The other robber barons who have been lining their pockets? Or “the people”. Nobody knows what any of them think or feel.
I am from Ukraine, but left before the USSR disintegrated and I speak to my friends in Ukraine on a regular basis. Some are so depressed, they don't even want to dump their depressive moods on their friends, and some are ready to register for another "round" in the war, because their Group 2 invalid pension is hard to live on.
EU membership is only out of reach if European leaders get to decide who's in their club. America can arrange a shotgun marriage. For the right price, of course. Our support in exchange for the pipeline network delivering gas to Europe. That's enormously valuable both financially and geopolitically, much more so than "rare earth". From Ukraine's point of view, EU membership is a good consolation prize when the alternative is nothing. It's a good deal for both sides. We can make it happen.
It's going to funny as hell when Russian becomes an official language of the EU due to Ukraine's ascension.
EU membership is Si ilar to a lite NATO membership since the EU has a defence clause written in it as well. That means as long as there is a war between Russia and Ukraine, no sober leader in Europe will take on Ukraine. Otherwise you would risk a war against Russia.
This has been a long time coming, and I am relieved and hopeful that more good news will follow. As an American, I believe it is time to let Europe go, particularly Britain. Starmer let the cat out of the proverbial bag with his remarks about Ukraine and NATO. Many may be surprised to find that Britain has interfered in U.S. affairs ever since we declared our independence. The threads of infiltration are many with the most obvious post-Revolution until the end of the Civil War and with the death of McKinley and thereafter. There is no “special relationship” only special manipulation. The situation permitted Starmer to believe he can speak for NATO when all he does is represent a failing state with the support of less than 20 percent of the people who do nothing about the fact that Britain is no democracy. Time for Americans to move away from Europe and cut Britain down to size. European involvement in NATO is irrelevant. The U.S. controls NATO and should initiate its demise.
Peacekeepers should of course be from NATO, even outside Article Five.
After all, as a British academic pointed out when the war began in 2014, the whole point of NATO is to 'confront the problems caused by its existence'.
They excelled at this for 20 years in Afghanistan, holed up in their fortified bases from which they would occasionally venture out to get shot at - on reconnaissance missions to try and find out who was shooting at them, or to attempt the relief of those ambushed on reconnaissance missions.
And their mission on Russia's borders has always essentially been a higher-tech version of the same crazy circular logic.
Of course it's a Great Game for the Western MIC - Afghanistan was a strategic disaster, but the best business model in military history.
A Polish commentator describes the present situation like this: “Today we’re like a movie set extra, whose appearance might be cut from the final version of the film altogether.”
The idea that European "peacekeepers" will form part of any agreement is laughable. Target practice maybe for the Russian military, but peacekeepers - never IMHO. And any boots on the ground [in the ground??] will not be covered by Article 5 per Hesgeth. I am sure someone will explain to me that this is a negotiating tactic, and a point to be conceded, but really if I was Russian, I would find such statements insulting.
The Europeans and Brits are spitballing. In an effort to appear relevant they're tossing out ideas left and right. However they are, and will be, ignored by the US and Russia. Once it's all over I expect Trump will send them a nice bouquet of flowers with a note reading, "You're welcome. Love, Donald."
A good -- and essential -- first step by the US and Russia. It will be interesting to see what effect this may have on the actual fighting. Will front line soldiers on either (or both?) sides become more reluctant to put their lives on the line in a conflict that is going to wind down?
It is very clear what Russia wants from any negotiations -- which is to have the Euros, US, and NATO stop treating them as The Enemy. The US (and hence NATO) can back off, but that still leaves those belligerent Euros. It is less clear what the US wants from the negotiations -- beyond terminating US involvement in Biden's proxy war (which the US can do without any agreement with Russia). And it is hard to see any resolution of the situation in the Ukraine that would not leave China in a stronger position with respect to Taiwan.
"UK Defense Secretary John Healey said that 'We hear your concerns on stepping up for Ukraine, and we hear your concerns on stepping up for European security. We are and we will.' CNN commented that 'The UK may quickly be supplanting the US as Ukraine’s closest western ally.'
"Given the absurd disproportion between U.S. and British military and economic resources, if any British official, politician, analyst, or journalist actually believes that this is a viable policy, they are criminal lunatics. If they don’t, and are just posturing for effect, they are wasting their own and everybody else’s time, because nobody in the world believes in the masquerade — least of all in Moscow or Kyiv."
It is wholly appropriate that Britain and France should again confront Russia in Ukraine.
After the Crimean and Russian Civil Wars, it's unfinished business tied at 1-1.
Britain, having evacuated the last Whites on their battleships after failing to stop Moscow a century ago, must be itching to get back on the field, if only with, say... a light cavalry brigade (Challengers are no use against fiber-optic drones).
To paraphrase Neil Armstrong, this is an important first step for the US and Russia, which could prove to be of huge significance for the entire world.
...or maybe dominos are green and they forgot to explain that.. but the why isn't Poland green like the dangerously threatened Baltics?... or Romania... or, maybe Switzerland?
The Brits and the EU are desperate to maintain the appearance of relevance in the Ukraine matter. However the sheer speed with which Trump moved to sideline them leaves them looking like fish flopping around on dry land.
It doesn't surprise me in the least that Trump has done this. Other than a few exceptions like Hungary and Slovakia, European leaders have been openly hostile to him. Starmer, the British labour leader, actually sent political operatives to campaign for Kamala Harris, Trump's opponent! Though he might have felt that way regardless, Mr. Trump surely feels he owes Europe nothing.
This is stark realpolitik occurring right before our eyes. It appears to be nothing less than a global realignment. Things like that don't happen every day, and even less do they happen without a major war. I'd judge that we're witnessing a once in a century geopolitical event.
Say what you like about Donald Trump, he is a catalyst for change. Given the direction the world was heading over the last 25 years, that can only be welcomed by sensible people. However with each move by Trump I become increasingly concerned for his personal safety. He is shaking up branch, trunk and root. He already had many enemies, and he's likely to have even more now.
Very well-said.
Agree
Thanks gentlemen.
Economic developments will soon make the UK and Europe irrelevant. They will suffer what they must.
Thanks indeed! Very informative and on time. It's high time for our countries to start constructive communication
Poor Ukraine. They must feel like a used condom that was thrown into a dumpster. No NATO membership and no EU membership, but a destroyed infrastructure, a traumatized society and the lowest birthrate and a collapsing economy. I hope other nations will see what this was truly about, weakening Russia with the aim of regime change in Moscow. The only ones laughing are the US. They played everyone, Ukraine, Russia and Europe and soon they will be off to the next country they can exploit for their evil goals.
"The only ones laughing are the US. They played everyone." Regarding Ukraine, this lies solely at the feet of the Biden administration. My hope is that those days are gone and the US can become an outwardly peaceful nation (no more wars). I am a retired US veteran who served 20 years for our nation. I have been saddened in recent years by our behavior in global affairs.
It was actually the Neocons, Nuland in particular (working on Eastern Europe at State since the 1990s) that gave us the Ukraine mess (and so many other costly, lethal disasters).
They don't care about domestic US politics much, switching from Bush Jr (Nuland was Cheney's foreign policy advisor) to Killary at State, then Biden, but only the power to implement their own agenda.
They only cared, and still care, about their crazy Manicheaen ideology of Good (Us) v Evil (Them).
I call myself a Progressive Realist.
I have different ends and values than Conservative Realists, but stand with them, including Trump and most of his team, against the crazy warmongering Neocons, whatever colour they choose, Red or Blue.
I respectfully disagree. Ukraine was Biden's war. He was itching for it. To the point that he directed an embarrassing retreat in Afghanistan. Sure, Nuland and crowd were advising, but the buck stops with Biden.
No, he just took over the Neocon project in 2020 - or the Neocons took him over.
The war started in 2014, with Nuland in charge.
The war had started long before that, but 2014 was a major flareup.
It started with Georgia that also borders on Black Sea, in 2008. Bush & Obama. Of course, Kosovo 1999 was already a major provocation that resulted in Putin succeeding Yeltsin.
The conflict started long before the war, but I'm not aware of armed clashes between AFU and the Russian military or even separatist militia before 2014.
In a sense the conflict started when 94% of Crimeams voted for renewed autonomy in 1991, only to be overruled by Kiev the following year.
Odd how that's never mentioned.
"The only ones laughing are the US" - nobody is laughing in the US. The "normal ones" are not laughing because they see how overextended the US got military & economically, and is perched on the precipice of the abyss. And the "abnormal ones" are not laughing because their gig in Ukraine is up, and for the elites, the day of reckoning might come.
When you say “poor Ukraine” who are you speaking for about? Zelenskyy and his cronies? The other robber barons who have been lining their pockets? Or “the people”. Nobody knows what any of them think or feel.
I am from Ukraine, but left before the USSR disintegrated and I speak to my friends in Ukraine on a regular basis. Some are so depressed, they don't even want to dump their depressive moods on their friends, and some are ready to register for another "round" in the war, because their Group 2 invalid pension is hard to live on.
I lived much of my adult life in Ukraine and I am in basically daily contact with Ukrainians of various flavors.
EU membership is only out of reach if European leaders get to decide who's in their club. America can arrange a shotgun marriage. For the right price, of course. Our support in exchange for the pipeline network delivering gas to Europe. That's enormously valuable both financially and geopolitically, much more so than "rare earth". From Ukraine's point of view, EU membership is a good consolation prize when the alternative is nothing. It's a good deal for both sides. We can make it happen.
It's going to funny as hell when Russian becomes an official language of the EU due to Ukraine's ascension.
EU membership is Si ilar to a lite NATO membership since the EU has a defence clause written in it as well. That means as long as there is a war between Russia and Ukraine, no sober leader in Europe will take on Ukraine. Otherwise you would risk a war against Russia.
This has been a long time coming, and I am relieved and hopeful that more good news will follow. As an American, I believe it is time to let Europe go, particularly Britain. Starmer let the cat out of the proverbial bag with his remarks about Ukraine and NATO. Many may be surprised to find that Britain has interfered in U.S. affairs ever since we declared our independence. The threads of infiltration are many with the most obvious post-Revolution until the end of the Civil War and with the death of McKinley and thereafter. There is no “special relationship” only special manipulation. The situation permitted Starmer to believe he can speak for NATO when all he does is represent a failing state with the support of less than 20 percent of the people who do nothing about the fact that Britain is no democracy. Time for Americans to move away from Europe and cut Britain down to size. European involvement in NATO is irrelevant. The U.S. controls NATO and should initiate its demise.
Peacekeepers should of course be from NATO, even outside Article Five.
After all, as a British academic pointed out when the war began in 2014, the whole point of NATO is to 'confront the problems caused by its existence'.
They excelled at this for 20 years in Afghanistan, holed up in their fortified bases from which they would occasionally venture out to get shot at - on reconnaissance missions to try and find out who was shooting at them, or to attempt the relief of those ambushed on reconnaissance missions.
And their mission on Russia's borders has always essentially been a higher-tech version of the same crazy circular logic.
Of course it's a Great Game for the Western MIC - Afghanistan was a strategic disaster, but the best business model in military history.
"Peacekeepers from NATO" is a contradiction in terms:-)
A Polish commentator describes the present situation like this: “Today we’re like a movie set extra, whose appearance might be cut from the final version of the film altogether.”
Good. Let's see whether anything concrete comes of it.
The idea that European "peacekeepers" will form part of any agreement is laughable. Target practice maybe for the Russian military, but peacekeepers - never IMHO. And any boots on the ground [in the ground??] will not be covered by Article 5 per Hesgeth. I am sure someone will explain to me that this is a negotiating tactic, and a point to be conceded, but really if I was Russian, I would find such statements insulting.
The Europeans and Brits are spitballing. In an effort to appear relevant they're tossing out ideas left and right. However they are, and will be, ignored by the US and Russia. Once it's all over I expect Trump will send them a nice bouquet of flowers with a note reading, "You're welcome. Love, Donald."
Imitation of feverish activity.
Triffids??
I will believe it when I see it - SA
The US should leave NATO.
A good -- and essential -- first step by the US and Russia. It will be interesting to see what effect this may have on the actual fighting. Will front line soldiers on either (or both?) sides become more reluctant to put their lives on the line in a conflict that is going to wind down?
It is very clear what Russia wants from any negotiations -- which is to have the Euros, US, and NATO stop treating them as The Enemy. The US (and hence NATO) can back off, but that still leaves those belligerent Euros. It is less clear what the US wants from the negotiations -- beyond terminating US involvement in Biden's proxy war (which the US can do without any agreement with Russia). And it is hard to see any resolution of the situation in the Ukraine that would not leave China in a stronger position with respect to Taiwan.
On Sir Winston Starmer:
"UK Defense Secretary John Healey said that 'We hear your concerns on stepping up for Ukraine, and we hear your concerns on stepping up for European security. We are and we will.' CNN commented that 'The UK may quickly be supplanting the US as Ukraine’s closest western ally.'
"Given the absurd disproportion between U.S. and British military and economic resources, if any British official, politician, analyst, or journalist actually believes that this is a viable policy, they are criminal lunatics. If they don’t, and are just posturing for effect, they are wasting their own and everybody else’s time, because nobody in the world believes in the masquerade — least of all in Moscow or Kyiv."
Anatol Lieven
It is wholly appropriate that Britain and France should again confront Russia in Ukraine.
After the Crimean and Russian Civil Wars, it's unfinished business tied at 1-1.
Britain, having evacuated the last Whites on their battleships after failing to stop Moscow a century ago, must be itching to get back on the field, if only with, say... a light cavalry brigade (Challengers are no use against fiber-optic drones).
In this weather, they'd need balaclavas.
Lol!
Pipe dream.
I hope the Brits and French go it alone. Good luck!
To paraphrase Neil Armstrong, this is an important first step for the US and Russia, which could prove to be of huge significance for the entire world.
Strange - the British map doesn't mark dominos
...or maybe dominos are green and they forgot to explain that.. but the why isn't Poland green like the dangerously threatened Baltics?... or Romania... or, maybe Switzerland?
How can Sergey Lavrov, Russia's Foreign Minister, be a counterpart to US Secretary of State Marco Rubia (sic) when the latter is an uber Zionist?
There wouldn't be Israel today in the current form, without the famous talk by Andrei Gromyko at the UN Security Council on May 14, 1947.
https://israeled.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/1947.5.14-Gromyko-Speech.pdf
Yep. That's the one. Terror and tooth gnashing descended on the US State Department in its aftermath.