Russo-Ukrainian War 2014-23 and Invasion

[Zanza]

Yeah Threviel - I agree that Europe needs to plan for the case where the US elects Trump and Trump moves to support Russia over Ukraine. But I'm not sure I understand your special animus against Germany here.

There is quite a bit of fair criticism of Germany regarding its stances on Russia (too close, naive) and Ukraine (too hesistant). But you also see a lot of unsubstantiated bashing, be it gas consumption or whatever. I just wondered if Threviel has something concrete.

[Zanza]

On European defense initiatives, Marine Le Pen's position is relevant. She wants to stop common military development, especially with Germany, and gets support from French industrialists for that. Also wants to withdraw from NATO command structures. So if she wins and Scholz has problems to pass his initiatives with his coalition, there will be no rebirth of European military power.

[Eddie Teach]

I'm pretty skeptical that the current round of Russophobia in Europe is more robust than the century old tradition in America.

[Sheilbh]

Germany seems to constantly work against the stream when in comes to actions against the Orcs and weapon shipments to Ukraine. Polling suggests that's what the krauts want with not even 50% of Germans supporting further actions on Ukraine.

Germany seems stuck in some idiot peacenik mode where neither the leadership nor the people seem to support some kind of realpolitik and this is very much a time for realpolitik.

So I think there's an issue of timing here. Germany has in remarkably little time revolutionised its position on energy, economic/trade and foreign and defence policy. I think there is a sense that Berlin is still slightly reeling from that and working what future policy looks like and how to make that shift real. It will not be easy or quick to overturn the practical implications of 30 years of consensus. But it is a huge shift - I think it's striking how purely positive the UK and US are in talking about this. Johnson's said Scholz's shift is "heroic", "historic", "seismic", "inspiring" - all of which are true. I think part of that is because there's a recognition that the mental and rhetorical shift is the quick bit, but also I think the US and UK want Germany to apply similar experience to its economic/export focus on China now rather than waiting for Taiwan to be invaded or even further abuses of human rights before doing it. Having said that I'd note that French especially and other European commentators and think-tankers are taking a far more cynical view of Germany than the US and the UK - I've seen a few of them basically suggest Scholz's dramatic turn is cover for Germany later dragging its feet and slowing things down again. I don't agree with it - but I think it's interesting and probably worth noting that it's coming more from European partners.

But Ukraine is being invaded now and its timeline is immediate. So what is revolutionary and challenging in Germany, is slow and a little underwhelming from Kyiv (or other countries that are further along the journey Germany's on). I think that's just a sad reality and I'm not sure there's a solution but I think broadly the rest of the West should be helping and supporting the Scholz because it's decision is huge. And practically speaking past policy is kind of irrelevant, the world isn't a morality play - what matters is what we do now and in the immediate term to support Ukraine.

The quibble with that is Krugman's point - and I've seen others make this point (again, especially French and European commentators). Germany's basic position is that it needs time to prepare its economy to adjust to moving from Russian fossil fuels because of decisions made by previous governments that means it's exposed. The point the critics make is that Germany did not in its policies or rhetoric show much sympathy with allowing Euro-countries to adjust slowly following fiscal mistakes made by their previous governments and the level of recession (in the case of Greece, a depression) imposed on those countries by Eurozone policies are a magnitude larger than what Germany would face if it moved off Russian oil and gas.

My own take leans to thinking it's a genuine transformation that will take time.

On European defense initiatives, Marine Le Pen's position is relevant. She wants to stop common military development, especially with Germany, and gets support from French industrialists for that. Also wants to withdraw from NATO command structures. So if she wins and Scholz has problems to pass his initiatives with his coalition, there will be no rebirth of European military power.

I hope Western allies are starting to think about what to do in the non-zero chance that we have Presidents Le Pen and Trump soon.

Edit: Also I think it's just a thing about impressions forming and even subsequent shifts in reality struggle to displace those impressions. I mentioned earlier the German policy problem of initially resisting something, then doing it but it gets no credit. I think there's an element of that here - same with the UK and sanctions which you still see all the time online.

[Jacob]

I'm pretty skeptical that the current round of Russophobia in Europe is more robust than the century old tradition in America.

Here's hoping the anti-Putin, pro-Ukraine unity lasts past the next few election cycles in both Europe and the US.

[Threviel]

Perhaps I'm imagining things, but there are a lot of anecdotal accounts of Germany in particular saying no to further measures.

Glad to be wrong on polling, I was going on the latest I could find with 30s of googling.

So yeah, perhaps harsh measures can be taken on Hungary.

The non-German specific parts of my diatribe still stands though.

[Jacob]

Perhaps I'm imagining things, but there are a lot of anecdotal accounts of Germany in particular saying no to further measures.

Glad to be wrong on polling, I was going on the latest I could find with 30s of googling.

So yeah, perhaps harsh measures can be taken on Hungary.

Yeah, hopefully. It's a bit of a challenge, because I expect Hungary is going to veto everything it can just to be annoying to extort concessions.

I know it's not as simple as all that, but I feel like everyone in the EU should sign up for EU 2.0 - and it's exactly the same except as EU except Hungary is not invited.

The non-German specific parts of my diatribe still stands though.

Yeah, I didn't find much to object to there.

[KRonn]

I was watching a video of the Javelin anti-armor missile. It has dual warheads, one behind the other, apparently so it will go through an initial armor barrier like a side skirt or a cage like is seen on some Russian tank turrets, and the second warhead goes into the vehicle.

[KRonn]

Yeah Threviel - I agree that Europe needs to plan for the case where the US elects Trump and Trump moves to support Russia over Ukraine. But I'm not sure I understand your special animus against Germany here.

Trump wouldn't be supporting Russia vs Ukraine. Trump was supplying Javelins and other nasty equipment to Ukraine when he was in office. I'd bet that he'd would be a lot faster in getting US armaments to Ukraine than it seems things are going now.

[Sheilbh]

I have no idea about military stuff but seems like Johnson's announced UK will be sending armoured vehicles (but not tanks?) and new anti-ship missiles to Ukraine. This was after previous announcement earlier this week of more anti-tank (Javellins and NLAWS), anti-air and "suicide" drones (what? ) - as well as "non-lethal" aid such as munitions, body armour and night vision goggles.

I think most of this has been going for a while so it's just more of the same supplies - with the exception of the armound vehicles and those drones. I've no idea what they are - I'm fully for sending basically anything to Ukraine - but does anyone know what the papers mean by "suicide" drones? I'm not sure what the armoured vehicles are either if not tanks? (Again I am basic and know nothing about weapons )

[HVC]

Basically kamikaze drones.

[Admiral Yi]

Trump wouldn't be supporting Russia vs Ukraine. Trump was supplying Javelins and other nasty equipment to Ukraine when he was in office. I'd bet that he'd would be a lot faster in getting US armaments to Ukraine than it seems things are going now.

He might stop for a while to give Zerensky a chance to investigate the Bidens.

[Admiral Yi]

"suicide" drones (what? )

I linked about this before.  Little tiny drones that you fly into a vehicle or position and it explodes.  The US is sending a bunch.

[DGuller]

Yeah Threviel - I agree that Europe needs to plan for the case where the US elects Trump and Trump moves to support Russia over Ukraine. But I'm not sure I understand your special animus against Germany here.

Trump wouldn't be supporting Russia vs Ukraine. Trump was supplying Javelins and other nasty equipment to Ukraine when he was in office. I'd bet that he'd would be a lot faster in getting US armaments to Ukraine than it seems things are going now.

We're going to get Trump again, aren't we? 

[HVC]

Trump wouldn't be supporting Russia vs Ukraine. Trump was supplying Javelins and other nasty equipment to Ukraine when he was in office. I'd bet that he'd would be a lot faster in getting US armaments to Ukraine than it seems things are going now.

He might stop for a while to give Zerensky a chance to investigate the Bidens.

Or if trump gets called out