The Big Picture - Where's the world going?

[Neil]

Does France or Britain have hundreds of billions in rare earths to offer?  What are they going to give Trump?

[Jacob]

On the EU I think there are a few big challenges and I don't know the answer of how it'll play out. And I think Europe's in a nightmare state.

...

I agree Europe is in a real shitty situation, and I agree significantly increased spending is necessary now. I believe Denmark has just announced increased, and I think the Nordics in general is going down that road.

On defense and the EU, I think what I'd go after is a smaller subset of European Nations - led by France, most likely - building a tight European alliance. Other more reluctant nations can then choose to fall in line or not.

It'd be great if the UK wanted to join, but right now it feels like you're more into waffling and trying to preserve the Atlantic alliance and "special relationship." Maybe some of the royal razzle dazzle can get Trump on board, but if not I think you're just chasing dreams there.

In terms of moral purity, I think that's out the window at least internationally. Turkey has interests in containing Russia, so they can be worked with (maybe on arms). China while a dictatorship is not actively at war with Europe (unlike Russia) and is at least consistent (unlike the US), so they're another likely partner.

I think Taiwan's goose is basically cooked. I don't think Trump will help much, and Europe is going to have a lot less room to throw Chinese relations out.

On resources, Canada has lots and is looking for partners. Of course, there's the issue of potentially being annexed by the US. In the short term that's probably off the table, but who knows in the long term.

[Jacob]

I think the continuing dependence of the European financial sector on the US makes any kind of concrete action to disentangle from America difficult.  The EU isn't equipped to deal with US sanctions (which would be the likely result of attempts to restrict the spread of disinformation via social media).  The EU is also hamstrung by fifth columnists like Orban. 

The EU isn't equipped to be a meaningful counterweight to a hostile United States.  It was designed to operate in an American world.  If Europe wants to try and build something, it'll have to be something new. 

Yeah I think you're right. Europe's not in a good position now, at all. Basically Putin is about to achieve his win conditions.

[mongers]

I don't think we should despair amidst this onrush of bullshit from Trump and his cronies.

It should be remembered, that the large majority or Russian mobile units are engaged in and effectively pinned within Ukraine, so what forces are left with which Putin can attack with or cause trouble in NATO countries?

Baring a sudden collapse of the Ukrainian Army, Putin's military will remain in a quagmire for as long as the Ukrainians keep fighting. Russia's navy is no real threat and their air force have failed to achieve air superiority in the war.

I think NATOs current forces in the East and the earmarked reinforcements are enough to halt a Russian assault against a Baltic sate, excluding the use of nuclear weapons.


What can't be planned for is just how far Trump is ready to 'sell out' Eastern European countries to Putin? 

By which I mean the US actively support Russian operations with intel, disruption to NATO logistics, with holding all ammunition and actively sabotaging joint or US weapons programmes in Europe

There lies Putin's only real hope for re-establishing a 'Soviet' empire.

[Jacob]

So I think the physical threat (to Europe beyond Russia) is not tomorrow. It's about the forces he can build up within the next five years, especially if sanctions are removed and he's receiving support from the US.

[mongers]

So I think the physical threat (to Europe beyond Russia) is not tomorrow. It's about the forces he can build up within the next five years, especially if sanctions are removed and he's receiving support from the US.

Yes, but that's predicated on Ukraine being knocked out soon, for better or worse for them, if they're still fighting Putin in 3-4 years time, Putin can't rebuild much of his army.

But as you say there's real additional danger for Putin being able to freely buy anything he wants and getting US military technology transfers.

[Sheilbh]

I agree Europe is in a real shitty situation, and I agree significantly increased spending is necessary now. I believe Denmark has just announced increased, and I think the Nordics in general is going down that road.

On defense and the EU, I think what I'd go after is a smaller subset of European Nations - led by France, most likely - building a tight European alliance. Other more reluctant nations can then choose to fall in line or not.

It'd be great if the UK wanted to join, but right now it feels like you're more into waffling and trying to preserve the Atlantic alliance and "special relationship." Maybe some of the royal razzle dazzle can get Trump on board, but if not I think you're just chasing dreams there.

On France - I think anything has to take into account the very real possibility of a Le Pen presidency in two years.

With the UK I don't think there's an inch of difference between the UK and the rest of Europe on this. Starmer's going to DC next week to lobby Trump for support, Macron's going the week after - that's coordinated. One hosted Trump as guest of honour on Bastille Day, the other might get the King to give a state dinner in a castle.

I've said before I really admire Tusk and Poland over the last three years as a European country that I think has appreciated the risk and changed their policies (and spending) to meet it. It's striking that they are currently taking the most pro-American line - absolutely rejecting attempting to create a "European NATO" or any alternative to the Atlantic Alliance.

Because the reality is what we can offer now, with US support of some sort, is a 30-50,000 "reassurance force" distant from the front line. What we can offer without US support is nothing. So the real question is whether we try to do something, which will require Trump's support, or nothing.

In the long run it's about increasing spending, building the military and industry to support it. Those two tracks of trying to work with the US and trying to build up European capacity aren't contradictory, they need to run in parallel. For example even giving him the win of saying you're massively increasing defence spending to x% because of Trump does both.

In terms of moral purity, I think that's out the window at least internationally. Turkey has interests in containing Russia, so they can be worked with (maybe on arms). China while a dictatorship is not actively at war with Europe (unlike Russia) and is at least consistent (unlike the US), so they're another likely partner.

I think Taiwan's goose is basically cooked. I don't think Trump will help much, and Europe is going to have a lot less room to throw Chinese relations out.

On resources, Canada has lots and is looking for partners. Of course, there's the issue of potentially being annexed by the US. In the short term that's probably off the table, but who knows in the long term.

Yeah. I've no idea on the long-run but I think you're right that Taiwan feels far less secure.

[crazy canuck]

A PC game from 1984.

The Ancient Art of War, from Brøderbund. I loved that game.

First computer game I ever played. And then I was hooked.

I started with AAOW at Sea before the original. 

Thus, Thor Foote was my first love.

(I forget which one of those was grumbler    )

 

[Jacob]

I saw a claim that Teump is giving the EU three weeks to agree to his Ukraine deal or he withdraws troops from Europe.

Of course, others have said there are no intention to withdraw.

Exciting times, that's for sure.

[Threviel]

Realistically we ought to be able to mobilise weapons production in a few months to be able to supply Ukraine independently of the US. It would cost huge amounts of money, but it is possible. If we could do it in WWI we can do it now even better.

Of course, that would take political will.

[celedhring]

Realistically we ought to be able to mobilise weapons production in a few months to be able to supply Ukraine independently of the US. It would cost huge amounts of money, but it is possible. If we could do it in WWI we can do it now even better.

Of course, that would take political will.

Heh, the complexity of building modern weapon systems is several magnitudes above what it took in WWI.

[Threviel]

Yes, for fighter jets and missiles. But Ukraine uses artillery, both western and Soviet, and ammunition for that is not hysterically more advanced. It would be expensive.

Likewise drones, infantry equipment, logistical vehicles and so on.

Lots of equipment could be produced and with huge investments even the more advanced equipment could be produced in a year or two.

I'm not saying it would be easy, but with a wartime expenditure of resources we could supply Ukraine enough to hold until production lines of serious equipment can go brrrr.

[Josephus]

Funny how just a couple years ago we were talking about the best way to let Putin walk away with his pride intact, and now, basically how much Ukraine is gonna get fucked.

[Duque de Bragança]

Funny how just a couple years ago we were talking about the best way to let Putin walk away with his pride intact, and now, basically how much Ukraine is gonna get fucked.

Macron infamously did:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jun/04/russia-must-not-be-humiliated-ukraine-emmanuel-macron

To be fair, almost three years ago.

[Valmy]

Funny how just a couple years ago we were talking about the best way to let Putin walk away with his pride intact, and now, basically how much Ukraine is gonna get fucked.

Macron infamously did:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jun/04/russia-must-not-be-humiliated-ukraine-emmanuel-macron

To be fair, almost three years ago.

I think that was a decent position once it became clear that Ukraine wasn't going to be quickly defeated. Maybe give Putin an out and we can all pretend this never happened.

But we are obviously way past that.