The result is that American public debate has shifted in a way that has taken America’s allies – and many Americans themselves – by surprise. The public takes peace for granted. “To some extent we are paying the price for our own success. In several generations now we have not had to deal with certain types of situations, or only very narrow slices of generations have had to deal with them since we’ve eliminated the draft. And so increasingly America is just in a very different place psychologically,” says Dr Haass.
In other words, Trumpism will not die with Trump, argues Mr Arnold, and betting British security on 300,000 swing voters every four years is not a viable long term policy.
“Trump is unpredictable. As military people say, hope cannot be part of the strategy. We have to understand there is a risk and we need to be ready for this risk,” says Mr Zagorodnyuk.
“And as such we need to understand what we are going to do to be self-sufficient. And it is actually possible. It is difficult but it is possible, especially with this massive technical transformation of the landscape of the world.”
Hahaha! i am sorry but that is just bizarre.
You would need a completely different academic, journalist and political class for that. In short another culture.
PS: i see that Roland Oliphant is more comfortable with a president that hated UK and now with an utmost incompetent President.
What Europe should fear, more than anything else? The fact that they’ve been shitty allies, on the whole. Not the UK and some of the smaller states, or Eastern Europe, but the French and German major members.
If you think that the average person in the US that served doesn’t remember finding literal tons of Euro-sourced weapons and equipment sold to Iraq during the sanctions regime, you’d be wrong. Lots of us noticed those “minor details”, and how Europe played patty-cake with Saddam’s “Oil for Food” scam. We also noted Chirac doing his best to keep his client safe, so he could sell him more military material and dual-purpose goods.
I’m really about done with the sanctimony and self-praise you hear from certain European circles, telling me how they’re so simon-pure and “above it all”, all while undermining any US attempt to do the sane things like keeping sanctions and no-fly zones in place. That lot of assholes made the war in Iraq a certainty and a necessity, because of the way they undermined sanctions and all the rest of the efforts to contain Saddam.
You can demonize the US all you like, but the sad fact is that any other power would have committed far more abuses around the world; we’ve been mostly a benign mercantile sort of affair as a “Great Power”. Everywhere we’ve been asked to, we’ve left. Usually after building our clients up; there aren’t any legacies of destruction like you’ll find in the former Soviet sphere.
And, yes… I do think we’re going into another isolationist phase, one that you can thank all the “smart people” in Europe for. You wanted the US out? Well, enjoy it being gone. I imagine that you’re shortly going to discover that all that defense largesse we went into debt for is going to have to be made up for, so kiss goodbye to all those nice social benefits you’ve gotten used to.
The “own goal” damage done to the European image here in the US is pretty astounding. I hope all those sales to the Iraqis and Iranians were worth it, in the long run… Not to mention, helping build up the Russians with all that oil and gas dosh, while selling them the equipment to build out their military again. If you think nobody notices the Austrian banks or their industrial contributions for artillery barrel manufacture, well… You’d probably be right. Few know about those, but the ones that do have long, long memories.
People talk about Americans being dumbasses and selling things to enemy or potential enemy states, but you’d have a long way to go for anyone to even begin to match the European record. Hell, going back to the fall of Constantinople, where the guns that blasted the walls were built by a Hungarian…
It’ll be a very expensive world, the one you’re going to get through wanting and constantly cutting down what the US was trying to do. At least, our saner leaders… I’ve got nothing on Joe Biden or Obama, who gave the Iranians billions to enable all of this idiocy. Those idiots, who I might add were beloved by all good Euros, are their own damn problems.
I don’t see too many people in Europe acknowledging the truths told them by Trump. He was right; all those oil and gas purchases in Russia were going to come back and bite them. Which it did. I still remember Merkel’s smug little smile, as she smirked at him.
Things like that are precisely why “Europe” is about to find itself on its own. Too bad, so sad… Self-inflicted wounds. With the above exceptions, most of Europe has been really shitty as allies.
Kirk is correct. The United States is indeed entering another neo-isolationist phase. Personally, I am in that camp. We have subsidized the defense of Europe and Indochina for far too long; it’s a luxury we can no longer afford. It’s time for Europe to stand on its own. If you truly think Russia is a threat it’s on you to resist it.
Oliphant ignores the fact that Ukraine is not a NATO member, and (I hope) never will be. It was an idiotic blunder to expand NATO by admitting as members former Soviet client states. NATO has outlived its usefulness. it’s time for the U.S. to formally withdraw from it. You all need to begin preparing for a US-less NATO. Its cousin SEATO was disbanded in 1977; NATO should have been, too, when the Warsaw Pact was.
I’m not sure about Asia. Our official policy with regard to Taiwan is the psychotic and undefined “strategic ambiguity”. No one knows what that means. China is indeed a geostrategic threat, but mostly from its economic power (its silk road initiative), not so much its military power (which is significant). From my perspective this is much more important than Russia.
I lost all interest in defending Germany the day I discovered that the people I was there to die defending decided I was a war criminal, and that they needed to come hold hands in a ring around our base, because… Reasons.
Also, when I was blithely informed that when the terrorists killed friends of mine, that they were doing God’s work.
I was rather glad, on the whole, when my career never took me back to Germany after that single assignment. Some Germans might not have been on-board with all that, but I noted a certain… Silence, on their part. With regards to Germany, if it were to leave NATO tomorrow, about all I’d say would be “Good riddance…” Between them and the French/Belgians, who needs enemies?
For what it’s worth, I also found lots and lots of sanctions-era packing crates that had been filled with NBC filters and masks from Avon, in Merry Olde Englande. Shipped into Iraq through Jordan, direct from England. The German, French, and Belgian stuff was far more prevalent, but there was something from nearly every major European “ally” to be found. The reports from the guys doing the WMD shakedown were… Interesting. Can’t talk about those, though… All classified, donchaknow?
’ Some Germans might not have been on-board with all that, but I noted a certain… Silence, on their part.’
Sounds familiar.
Whilst I absolutely agree Europe needs to stump up more and look to its own defence, it was an idiotic blunder of epic magnitude not to extend it to Ukraine. Simply put, this war would never have happened had that been the case. Moreover, Poland and Germany need their own nuclear weapons, that is now absolutely clear. Ditto Japan. Anyone relying on a credible deterring threat that the USA will push the button after a Russian or Chinese first-use that was not against USA is a fool.
Also, the USA did not take a dominant position in Europe’s defence (or indeed anyone else’s defence) out of the goodness of its own heart, that’s just not how geopolitics works.
Maybe, maybe not. A more nuanced view would be that, at present, Russia really only calculates how likely US involvement is in determining whether to hold back, and that NATO is a weak proxy in that calculation. There’s a treaty obligation for the US to respond if a NATO country is attacked, but there’re responses and there’re responses. (Unclear what I mean? Imagine NATO member Germany responding to a Russian attack on hypothetical NATO member Ukraine; now imagine the US reacting in a similarly lackadaisical manner.) Until Europe steps up, NATO membership for Ukraine is only as good as the US commitment. In fact, quite the contrary to NATO per se providing a deterrent, it can actually act as an invitation in cases where Russia doubts the US commitment, simply because Russia will leap at any opportunity to demonstrate to the rest of the NATO alliance that there are cracks. NATO per se doesn’t act as a deterrent – only the US does. That is current reality. It can, and should, change. Europe can, and should, carry its weight in the alliance. But right now it doesn’t. And because it doesn’t, it isn’t clear to me that NATO membership for Ukraine would’ve helped avoid this situation (esp. in context of the botched Afghanistan pullout). At present, Russia only calculates whether the US is willing and able to defend a NATO member; it doesn’t actually care whether a state is a NATO member.
Nobody ever tells us when we consider renewing Trident that the reason we have our own nukes, and ones which are indistinguishable on Russian radar from US nukes, is that we do not trust some notional future POTUS to push the button to save us.
We should not be America’s poodle, because the three-letter outfits and the State department don’t care what we think. Also, Kirk, they don’t care what you think either or anybody from the flyover states.
We should ignore the siren voices of those who advocate cutting off our economic nose to gain influence in the world or ‘punch above our weight’
And as for dreading the prospect of TRUMP! as if we hadn’t seen what he does as president the first time, as opposed to what? Biden? Blimey.
Taken together with his recent remarks about the necessity of not rewarding Russian aggression, I very much agree with Kirk’s comments here.
(Though i have not studied his comments carefully. Sorry, Kirk, but the day is too short at 24 hours.)
I particularly like his snide remarks about Germany, France, and Belgium.
But i note that the present situation is to some extent the fault of the US ruling class, for not pressing the Germans earlier on to pay their way.
— Until a few months ago, i worried:
What is wrong with Donald Trump?
Why does he not say loud and clear that, by lowering oil+gas prices, he can and will both cut Russian revenues, and generate enough American revenues to support Ukraine?
Now i think that his silence on this is perhaps a tactic to scare Germany & France into paying their fair share.
But perhaps that is wishful thinking on my part.
@Laird
The United States is indeed entering another neo-isolationist phase.
I see no evidence to support that, on the contrary it seems to me that America is determined to stick its nose into every international argument in every dingy corner of the world. I think Trump is a bit more isolationist that Biden, but not by much.
Personally, I am in that camp. We have subsidized the defense of Europe and Indochina for far too long; it’s a luxury we can no longer afford. It’s time for Europe to stand on its own. If you truly think Russia is a threat it’s on you to resist it.
Me too, in fact there is a name for this, it is called “libertarian foreign policy”. But a lot of libertarians who I respect have an “ah but”… “sure I believe in low taxes… ah but this thing I really believe in we need to tax people for”, “sure I am a passionate advocate of free speech, … ah but we obviously can’t allow people to say these sorts of terrible things”, “sure I believe we should mind our own business on the world stage… ah but we need to intervene in this particularly egregious case”. However, the number of people in this country who actually agree with you or I on this is very small indeed. There is a huge appetite for America, the Paladin, to go in and right all the wrongs we see on CNN… for a few years, anyway, until it gets too expensive and until it becomes apparent that the military leadership of the United States has entirely forgotten how to win wars.
I’m not sure about Asia. Our official policy with regard to Taiwan is the psychotic and undefined “strategic ambiguity”. No one knows what that means. China is indeed a geostrategic threat, but mostly from its economic power (its silk road initiative), not so much its military power (which is significant). From my perspective this is much more important than Russia.
In the long term Taiwan will again become Formosa. It is inevitable, just as before with Hong Kong and Macau. China wants it and, short of destroying the world in a nuclear war, they will have it. But as ever the Chinese are very patient. Unfortunately the west is deeply dependent on Taiwan, and so I entirely agree with Ramaswamy’s policy — sunset it. Provide them the support of the US Navy for five or ten years. Allow the west to wean itself off the chips it can only make, in that time allow Taiwan to make itself a bristling fortress, with an M-16 and a thousand rounds of ammo in every house, and coastal defenses to make any navy quake. Or alternatively if they prefer, let the people of Taiwan negotiate entry into China in a way that gives them at least some of the independence they want. Then get America out of this dangerous standoff. “Friendship and commerce with all, entangling alliances with none” a wise man once said.
At least since the Blair premiership, British foreign policy has been largely counterproductive and I have a hard time trying to identify what national interests were being pursued, or if I can, they were pursued incompetently. Add the addiction to massive immigration, mostly from the third world, letting states like China and Gulf monarchies snap up British companies, stupid energy policies, and you have national suicide being pursued.
The Trump presidency and Brexit may have been opportunities to embrace a rethink, but the British government seemed largely to treat the Trump presidency as something to be waited out until a BAU successor came along, and as I feared since 2016, the Tories implemented Brexit finally but have made sure it’s an almost total damp squid.
Although it was less involved in global affairs pre-WW2 than after, the extent the US was ‘isolationist’ is exaggerated. The Philippines was a US colony, and there were several American interventions in the Carribbean and Latin America between the 1910s and 1940s.
Given American immigration policies over the last several decades I think this has made non-interventionism much harder to pursue due to the increasing influence of diasporas in American politics.
“The public now takes peace for granted” – speaking of the United States which has spend vast sums of money, and very large numbers of human lives, losing (losing) wars for decades.
“We are victims of our own success”.
If the academic left his Ivory Tower he would see this “success” is the decaying towns and cities of the United States and the collapse of American culture and society – which is part of the general collapse of Western culture and society, even a biological collapse – with a fertility rate well below replacement level and the proposed “solution” mass-third-world-immigration really meaning the death of nations.
I am glad I know longer subscribe to the Telegraph – their pet intellectuals think that war is peace, defeat is victory, and that decline is “success”.
Treating President Trump as if he was some “boo-hiss” figure.
As the people who used to join the United States armed forces, before the present recruitment crises, are “Trump voters” – the hatred of “Trump” is clearly hatred of the sort of people (the “Trump voters” or “Red Necks” – a slur) who fought to libertate Europe in World War II and protected Europe during the Cold War.
Why be allies with a European, indeed American, elite that hates you? And who wishes to destroy you.
Let the academic defend himself – although he is unlikely to wish to do so.
When a German academic-politician had his daughter raped and murdered by a “migrant” his first action was to give money to a “charity” to bring in more “migrants”.
Ten out of ten for logical consistency – the person applied to his own family the doctrine of destruction he intends for his nation and the West generally.
However, it would be unwise to support an international establishment elite who have this “liberal” mentality.
As the first Secretary General of NATO, Lord Ismay said, the purpose of NATO was “to keep the Soviet Union out, the Americans in, and the Germans down”…