Politico eu had an important article a couple of days ago about the house of cards that is the russian economy. We'll worth a read. Ukraine needs to stay strong this year. The end for russias war is closer than people realize.
The Russian economy is in terrible shape with rampant inflation, high interest rates, and labor shortages. They cannot replenish equipment or capital stock of any kind. But much of this continued collapse depends on whether the US will continue sanctions. The good thing is the US cannot unilaterally lets them use the SWIFT system for banking and no meaningful help will come from China as their economy is in rough shape with high unemployment and lots of banking problems that have been masked.
If you want to wage a war with high-precision weapons, you want a good economy.
If you want to wage a war with troops on crutches supplied by donkey, the worse the economy, the better, so cannon fodder is abundant and cheap.
Note that Putin doesn’t want to win the war, just to wage it. To be a force to be reckoned with, to have powerful people beg him for peace, for people to be afraid of WWIII, to be once again invited to sit at the table with the big boys. He doesn’t want the war to end, even on the best of terms for him—he’d lose all leverage and he’d gain nothing.
I agree that Starmer needs to up his game and make it clear that UK support will continue until Ukraine defeats Russia in battle and restores its 1991 International borders. However, the UK has been so integrated with the US since WWII, disconnecting our security links will take time but I do fear that Starmer's view is that the UK will act as a bridge to the US and so he will be cautious. Unfortunately, Starmer needs to accept that the US is now unreliable and we need to start forging closer links with Europe and that may start this afternoon in London when the heavy hitters arrive. Merz and Germany are key and I hope that Starmer finds his spine amongst like minded leaders but I will note that Macron also contacted Trump after the Oval Office ambush.
I agree Trump is now just a mouthpiece for Putin and both Ukraine and Europe need to plan for no more US assistance and even making contingencies for the US actively joining the axes of evil. If that does happen that could be the lightening rod which finally shows Europe how far Trump is willing to descend to the dark side. Sadly we are not there yet.
Merz has the potential to really impact Europe's future approach and I hope that he grasps the enormity of this very unstable situation and puts the full economic might of Germany behind Ukraine and provides the necessary leadership to inspire other nations to up their support.
Pres Z was very inspiring in the Oval Office. Stoic, resilient and was not backing down which seemed to wind Trump up further but just showed how thin-skinned that mofo is. The coordination with the media was quite something and unless they really are that stupid it was clear that this was a set up and they were not even trying to hide it. Pres Z has throughout this maintained his decorum but I'm sure he is fuming and will prepare Ukraine to continue the fight without the US and as you say it's now over to Europe. Will they step up?
I know you are sceptical that Europe will do the right thing, but I am confident that they will. Whether they disconnect from the US is another matter but I think Trump will help them when he introduces tarrifs to not only the EU but also the UK which I think Vance is pushing. Look for a statement in the House from Starmer on Monday, that may give us an idea as to his current line of thinking.
Alan, I share your hope for the UK and James Holland wrote a Substack a couple days ago that argues Labour can engage in Keynesian type spending for rearmament which makes great sense!
Starmer still thinks that he can be that conduit to the US as does Macron. However, they are still living in the past. The conference in London this afternoon is talking about UK, France, Ukraine and a few others hashing out a sustainable peace plan and then presenting it to the US. Unfortunately, the US is no longer an honest arbitor for Ukraine and Trump has evidenced that by giving away everything to Russia and taking what he can for the US. Anything presented by Europe to the US will be rejected by the petulant man-child Trump because its formulation excluded US input. He wants the Nobel Peace prize.
Europe is best placed now to represent Ukraine, and their leaders need to recognise and embrace the challenge. Trump will not back down. He expects Pres Z to come on bended knee having profusely apologised and begged for forgiveness and he will still not provide any security guarantees and Europe needs to understand that and take the lead whilst sidelining the US. A difficult ask but ultimately would be best for Ukraine. Even now Trump's enabling muppits are suggesting that they will not talk with Ukraine until Zelensky is gone because he is the strong leader that will not bow thus showing up the bullying, contemptious Trump.
Europe needs to stop living in the past, arm Ukraine to win and embrace this historic moment.
Finally, I would love to see Europe negotiate a fair "rare earth" minerals deal with Ukraine that truly recognises their sovereignty and rub salt in the gaping US wound of failed diplomacy.
Two questions. What are the UK-US security links that will take time to disconnect? What does Europe need to do in support of Ukraine that it is not doing already?
Supply it to win, not just to survive. Ukraine’s been putting its own sanctions on Russia’s oil and gas industry using homemade drones, imagine what it could have done with a decent quantity of long-range missiles.
Unfortunately, Russia has built a new mainland railroad to supply its forces in Zaporhizia and southern Donetsk. It appears the Kerch Bridge is now considered secondary. It makes sense because everyone wants to blow it up and it took a long to repair when Ukraine last tried. It is very difficult to blow up railway lines and trains, although Ukraine has had some success doing so.
Regarding Europe (I assume you mean NATO but without the USA) operating in western Ukraine. Russian aircraft don't even cross the frontline so we're talking about shooting at cruise missiles and drones. Ukraine already does a great job destroying 80-90% of those. It's the Iskanders and Kinzhals that are the biggest threats. One is a ballistic missile, the other an air-launched hypersonic missile. Both move so fast they are very difficult to intercept in time. Aircraft in Western Ukraine are not much help with those, I'm afraid.
Regarding supply to win, not survive. Russian troops outnumber Ukrainian. It is pretty hard to win a war on those terms regardless of how well supplied you are. Instead, Ukraine is trading small packets of land in exchange for huge Russian losses in an attempt to overturn that balance. The bad news is that the cessation of supplies from the USA will make that much harder. The good news is that in almost the weapons categories that are no longer primarily US-supplied, Ukraine is becoming better equipped and supplied. But it faces more obstacles than just being outnumbered. Ukraine is a vast country. The frontline stretches 1,300km and Ukrainian forces are so thinly stretched that there is little opportunity to rotate those units to the rear for training (or even rest) let alone concentrate forces for an offensive.
Unhappily, there are increasing warnings that Russia is about to extend the active frontline and the Ukrainians even further with new offensives north of Sumy and Chernihiv. This is Putin's plan: stretch Ukraine like an elastic band until it snaps. Trouble is he's running out of armour and mobile artillery: the weapons you need to force a breakthrough then exploit it. Meanwhile, Ukraine's long-range drones are becoming more and more effective. They have their own cruise missiles now and the Neptune missile too. All of these went into mass production late last year. Russian industry is going to face a very tough year.
Ukraine is winning this war of attrition, much as Frederick the Great did in the Seven Years War. Back then it took the death of the Tsar for that war to end. The same might be true this time too. However, as sanctions continue to bite and Ukraine's long-range war increases, that might not be necessary. Have faith, Ukraine is doing a great job.
Martin, the UK Intelligence services are massively intertwined with the US and we also have a number of US bases. If the US is travelling down the dark side as seems possible, it will impact our military. Think F35 and software updates, aircraft that have data-links ensuring seemless integration and communication, satellite systems that are inter-operable. That is without thinking too much about what is currently integrated.
As for Europe, they need to increase their material support to ensure it is sufficient for Ukraine to prevail on the battlefield and strengthen their negotiating position.
Thanks, Alan. Isn't it even worse than that since it affects the whole Five Eyes global network? Am I right in thinking that towards the end of Trump's first term, a lot of intel was with-held because of his behaviour (later fully justified by the Mar-a-Largo fiasco)? That's likely to happen again, surely? Would Trump be stupid enough to jeopardise the Five Eyes intel? Yes. Would Congress permit that? No one knows but that intel is too valuable to simply stop collecting right now.
Trump can try to stop F-35 sales and updates and also satellite coms. But has he the power to do so? He'll be putting a lot of US companies out of business if he does. The only beneficiaries of that would be the European aviation and space industries. Great for Europe, very bad for America.
I could go on forever about your comment on Europe needing to increase its material support. A lot of people post that same thought here. I think you are all using the wrong tense. Europe is already giving Ukraine the support it needs. The news of that support is not widely publicised, and, in Germany's case, I suspect Scholz was quite pleased it wasn't since he pushed through an enormous amount of aid with little publicity and less domestic controversy. Put simply, when was the last time everyone was aware Ukraine was not getting the aid it needed? It was this time last year, and that was because the Republicans in Congress stopped munitions supplies. Nothing to do with Europe at all but it was European nations who responded by sourcing fresh supplies and bringing even more munitions productions online both in Ukraine and across Europe. Ukraine now has almost all the shells it needs without relying upon the USA. And more munitions plants are coming on stream this year. Commitments were made 2-3 years ago to supply Ukraine with the battlefield armour it needs, the artillery it needs, the munitions it needs, the radars, the... the list is near endless. It took time to build the plants that build those weapons. There's no magic wand that can be waved to bring high-tech productions line equipped with specialist machine tool into existence overnight. You probably did not hear about all this because most reporters (and their readers) fell for simplistic often fact-free narratives. But it is something that should be celebrated. In real terms, European aid to Ukraine has already outstripped all the Lease-Lend aid sent to the Soviet Union in WWII.
I fear many fail to see that the US is not just hostile to the post war rules based order, but has joined the side of the autocracies and may soon be sending military aid to Russia in support of what Trump/Vance will portray as a “just war” against the woke ideologies of Europe.
European democracies need to circle the wagons and plan for a long haul. Co-ordinated rearmament, independently controlled satellite intelligence gathering, independently controlled nukes, strict media regulation including banning social media that promotes disinformation, reform NATO (minus the US). Sadly, I fear the nature of liberal democracy will make such actions unlikely.
"Can people please, please, stop trying to force Ukraine to somehow try to work things out with Trump. He wishes ill on Ukraine and will do everything he can to help Putin."
Phillips, how long will it be until the US stops sharing intelligence with Ukraine and starts sharing it with Russia? And if that does happen, to what degree are other (European) states able to step in to replace the US in this capacity?
Rutte’s statement was truly moronic. If Ukraine falls, Russia stands on the German border and the Italian one. Slovakia, Hungary and Austria will either switch sides or fall like dominos.
One of the biggest failures of not only Biden but also Pelosi and the entire Democratic Party was complete inaction (other than one disappointing hearing with Mueller) on the Russian collusion. Which was in fact an even bigger deal that January 6, since a government beholden to an unfriendly foreign power is worse than an authoritarian government. The Dems effectively ratified "Russia hoax" GOP narrative, and that's a big factor in lots of bad takes on the Oval Office meeting even from non-Republicans and, very importantly, foreign leaders. People come up with tortured explanations instead of acknowledging the simple truth that Trump has been in cahoots with Putin for at least a decade.
I agree with most of what you say. But it's not like the Dems didn't try. When the Attorney General announces that Mueller's report essentially exonerates Trump (before anybody else has seen he report) that is an effective propaganda tool. It ends the issue for about 70% of the country.
Mueller is the villain. He did a decent job with his investigation and report. He needed to resign in protest when his boss lied to the public. He gave only a whimper of feedback.
I mentioned the hearing in which they questioned Mueller. But that was very far from enough. To begin with, he 1) had a very narrow scope, i.e. only the presidential campaign itself, but not Trump's previous history with Russia or, very importantly, Trump's finances, 2) he operated under DOJ guidelines not allowing indictment of sitting president, and, most importantly, 3) he was limited strictly to prosecutable crimes, and it's not actually a crime for a presidential candidate to collaborate with a foreign government. The very appointment of a special counsel was basically a cover-up. Just like after 9/11, what we needed was the answers not to questions "who can we indict?" but "what happened, how it happened, and what can we do to prevent it from happening again?". We needed a 9/11 commission with broad subpoena powers, co-chaired, say, by Condi Rice and Leon Panetta. In early 2021 the Dems had full control of Congress and DOJ, Trump support was at the lowest point, and there was a potential conduct investigation not only of January 6, but of all things Trump. They could have built on Mueller Report and Senate Intelligence Committee report. They just need to look at Trump finances. But no, they decided Russian collusion was not nearly as important as January 6.
It's amazing that serious people still deny reality almost 8 years since Trump all but admitted that he effectively promised Putin to lift sanctions under the Magnitsky Act in exchange for help against Hillary.
Andrew, it will continue as denial is more comfortable than seeing the ugly truth and all its consequences. But the less is simple. Believe people when they tell you who they are.
Kaja Kallas has been a very strong voice in support of Ukraine for years now, beginning when she was prime minister of Estonia. She has seen very clearly what needs to be done, as do the rest of the Baltics. Maybe she reads you, Phillips, would be good, but I don't think she needs priming.
a few good points, norway will no longer supply fuel to the american fleet, germany has begun to manafacture tarus missiles, sweeden has placed an order for their grippen fighters to be supplied with them, now the bad news, it seems as if america has stopped all military aid to ukraine, this was posted on x by a realible scource
In late February, Thomas Friedman wrote an opinion column for the NY Times in which he noted that:
"A serious U.S. president would recognize that Putin is playing a very weak hand that we should exploit. As The Economist noted last week, most of Russia’s “gains were in the first weeks of the war. In April 2022, following Russia’s retreat from the north of Ukraine, it controlled 19.6 percent of Ukrainian territory; its casualties (dead and wounded) were perhaps 20,000. Today Russia occupies 19.2 percent and its casualties are 800,000, reckon British sources. … More than half of the 7,300 tanks [Russia] had in storage are gone. Of those that remain, only 500 can be reconditioned quickly. By April, Russia may run out of its T-80 tanks. Last year it lost twice as many artillery systems as in the preceding two years. … The reallocation of resources from productive sectors to the military complex has fueled double-digit inflation. Interest rates are 21 percent.”
If this were poker, Putin is holding a pair of twos and bluffing by going all in. Trump, instead of calling Putin’s bluff, is saying, “I think I’ll fold.”
Phillips, I was hoping you were wrong about Trump. But you seem to have been proven right.
Was I the only one that heard J.D. Vance laughing multiple times anytime a reporter asked Zelenskyy a condescending question or anytime Trump answered a question by undermining Zelenskyy’s arguments?
18:47 I hear JD laughing at the question about Zelenskyy’s suit.
21:51 “What gave you the moral conviction to re-engage with Putin” JD laughs.
Also, am I the only one that sees the irony that many MAGA supporters believe Yanukovych was ousted in a CIA-directed color revolution, and now Trump is trying to get Zelenskyy to resign contrary to both Ukrainian law and the will of the Ukrainian people?
"French President Emmanuel Macron has set a goal to revive dialogue between the Ukrainian and US authorities, despite the rift between the leaders of the two nations, Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Donald Trump, on Friday at the White House. He is confident that distancing from Kyiv does not align with Washington’s interests, according to Macron’s interview with La Tribune Dimanche."
I believe that we have seen yesterday is Trump's reaction to Zelensky having refused the Trump-mandated national suicide deal.
I agree that Europe has to make a very important decision. The problem is that too few people are paying enough attention to what is going on. It looks to me like no decision is going to be taken at this time. That of course is a decision in itself — a decision that is very likely to have terrible consequences.
They'll still have to. Europe will fail in its own newly announced effort to negotiate a non-suicidal deal for Ukraine (since it won't be acceptable to Russia), Ukraine will refuse whatever Trump and Putin will demand from them, Trump will completely cut off Ukraine, Zelensky will announce fight to the death, and Europe will have to deal with the fact that Ukrainian defeat will have horrible consequences for Europe (the least bad of which will be an unprecedented flood of refugees, or at least unprecedented since the mass movement of Germans from the eastern regions in 1945).
Sooner or later the Europeans will be forced to deal with the simple reality that there's no clever diplomatic formula for sustainable peace in Europe, no Solomonic compromise. It will only be possible when either the Ukrainians give up their nationhood or the Russians give up their imperial dreams. The former will never happen (the Europeans may want to consult the Brits about their experience with the Irish), and even if Ukraine is completely occupied, there will be an insurgency (like in 1944-1954). The latter won't happen until the Russians take a very good beating.
One thing the EU can...and should do...is confiscate as much of the Russian funds, now frozen in EU banks, as possible and give them to Ukraine. Anything the US controls will probably be released to Russia by Trump so that is out of reach. That's enough funding to keep Ukraine afloat...at least economically...through the rest of this year, perhaps beyond. As much of that money should be spent in Europe, not the US.
I hope that the Europeans ban Twitter/X as soon as possible. It is basically a recruiting tool for Neo-fascism. I don't think most people understand how effective a weapon this is. Because if they did, it would be banned and most parts of the world.
Many are understandably angry at Rutte for putting the onus on Zelensky to fix the relationship with Washington. From what I've seen from former diplomats and foreign policy analysts he is not an outlier. The ex-government figures from G.B. and the U.S. (I think I sampled half a dozen) are all dedicated to a negotiated deal and Trump's leadership is the only option. They know how horrible Trump & Vance are, they evidently see no possibility that Europe can provide alternative resources and leadership.
The analysis and opinions we see here on substack do not reflect the establishment view that appears on broader media.
Ian Bremmer had a balanced take, IMO. He has always been a bit of a defeatist, but he at least retains a sliver of hope that Europe might rally.
I think what we are seeing is that those who want to see a negotiated resolution don't actually much care what the deal looks like. Oh, they themselves have offered very attractive resolutions with strong security guarantees. But the fact that Trump is prioritizing an economic lifeline to Putin, making a peace far more dangerous, gives nobody pause. Nothing matters other than getting an armistice. And I'm including the most sophisticated thought leaders.
Politico eu had an important article a couple of days ago about the house of cards that is the russian economy. We'll worth a read. Ukraine needs to stay strong this year. The end for russias war is closer than people realize.
PS watch their gold reserves shrink!
https://www.politico.eu/article/vladimir-putin-russia-donald-trump-moscow-ukraine-gdp-finance-war-banks/
If Trump lifts sanctions, he will save Putin, that's why I'm sure he'll do it quite soon.
Thanks for the link, Thomas! Very interesting piece
The Russian economy is in terrible shape with rampant inflation, high interest rates, and labor shortages. They cannot replenish equipment or capital stock of any kind. But much of this continued collapse depends on whether the US will continue sanctions. The good thing is the US cannot unilaterally lets them use the SWIFT system for banking and no meaningful help will come from China as their economy is in rough shape with high unemployment and lots of banking problems that have been masked.
If you want to wage a war with high-precision weapons, you want a good economy.
If you want to wage a war with troops on crutches supplied by donkey, the worse the economy, the better, so cannon fodder is abundant and cheap.
Note that Putin doesn’t want to win the war, just to wage it. To be a force to be reckoned with, to have powerful people beg him for peace, for people to be afraid of WWIII, to be once again invited to sit at the table with the big boys. He doesn’t want the war to end, even on the best of terms for him—he’d lose all leverage and he’d gain nothing.
Phillips, another useful analysis, thank you.
I agree that Starmer needs to up his game and make it clear that UK support will continue until Ukraine defeats Russia in battle and restores its 1991 International borders. However, the UK has been so integrated with the US since WWII, disconnecting our security links will take time but I do fear that Starmer's view is that the UK will act as a bridge to the US and so he will be cautious. Unfortunately, Starmer needs to accept that the US is now unreliable and we need to start forging closer links with Europe and that may start this afternoon in London when the heavy hitters arrive. Merz and Germany are key and I hope that Starmer finds his spine amongst like minded leaders but I will note that Macron also contacted Trump after the Oval Office ambush.
I agree Trump is now just a mouthpiece for Putin and both Ukraine and Europe need to plan for no more US assistance and even making contingencies for the US actively joining the axes of evil. If that does happen that could be the lightening rod which finally shows Europe how far Trump is willing to descend to the dark side. Sadly we are not there yet.
Merz has the potential to really impact Europe's future approach and I hope that he grasps the enormity of this very unstable situation and puts the full economic might of Germany behind Ukraine and provides the necessary leadership to inspire other nations to up their support.
Pres Z was very inspiring in the Oval Office. Stoic, resilient and was not backing down which seemed to wind Trump up further but just showed how thin-skinned that mofo is. The coordination with the media was quite something and unless they really are that stupid it was clear that this was a set up and they were not even trying to hide it. Pres Z has throughout this maintained his decorum but I'm sure he is fuming and will prepare Ukraine to continue the fight without the US and as you say it's now over to Europe. Will they step up?
I know you are sceptical that Europe will do the right thing, but I am confident that they will. Whether they disconnect from the US is another matter but I think Trump will help them when he introduces tarrifs to not only the EU but also the UK which I think Vance is pushing. Look for a statement in the House from Starmer on Monday, that may give us an idea as to his current line of thinking.
Alan, I share your hope for the UK and James Holland wrote a Substack a couple days ago that argues Labour can engage in Keynesian type spending for rearmament which makes great sense!
Starmer still thinks that he can be that conduit to the US as does Macron. However, they are still living in the past. The conference in London this afternoon is talking about UK, France, Ukraine and a few others hashing out a sustainable peace plan and then presenting it to the US. Unfortunately, the US is no longer an honest arbitor for Ukraine and Trump has evidenced that by giving away everything to Russia and taking what he can for the US. Anything presented by Europe to the US will be rejected by the petulant man-child Trump because its formulation excluded US input. He wants the Nobel Peace prize.
Europe is best placed now to represent Ukraine, and their leaders need to recognise and embrace the challenge. Trump will not back down. He expects Pres Z to come on bended knee having profusely apologised and begged for forgiveness and he will still not provide any security guarantees and Europe needs to understand that and take the lead whilst sidelining the US. A difficult ask but ultimately would be best for Ukraine. Even now Trump's enabling muppits are suggesting that they will not talk with Ukraine until Zelensky is gone because he is the strong leader that will not bow thus showing up the bullying, contemptious Trump.
Europe needs to stop living in the past, arm Ukraine to win and embrace this historic moment.
Finally, I would love to see Europe negotiate a fair "rare earth" minerals deal with Ukraine that truly recognises their sovereignty and rub salt in the gaping US wound of failed diplomacy.
Two questions. What are the UK-US security links that will take time to disconnect? What does Europe need to do in support of Ukraine that it is not doing already?
Supply it to win, not just to survive. Ukraine’s been putting its own sanctions on Russia’s oil and gas industry using homemade drones, imagine what it could have done with a decent quantity of long-range missiles.
Take over the air defense of Western Ukraine.
Supply something to demolish the Crimean Bridge.
Etc.
Unfortunately, Russia has built a new mainland railroad to supply its forces in Zaporhizia and southern Donetsk. It appears the Kerch Bridge is now considered secondary. It makes sense because everyone wants to blow it up and it took a long to repair when Ukraine last tried. It is very difficult to blow up railway lines and trains, although Ukraine has had some success doing so.
Regarding Europe (I assume you mean NATO but without the USA) operating in western Ukraine. Russian aircraft don't even cross the frontline so we're talking about shooting at cruise missiles and drones. Ukraine already does a great job destroying 80-90% of those. It's the Iskanders and Kinzhals that are the biggest threats. One is a ballistic missile, the other an air-launched hypersonic missile. Both move so fast they are very difficult to intercept in time. Aircraft in Western Ukraine are not much help with those, I'm afraid.
Regarding supply to win, not survive. Russian troops outnumber Ukrainian. It is pretty hard to win a war on those terms regardless of how well supplied you are. Instead, Ukraine is trading small packets of land in exchange for huge Russian losses in an attempt to overturn that balance. The bad news is that the cessation of supplies from the USA will make that much harder. The good news is that in almost the weapons categories that are no longer primarily US-supplied, Ukraine is becoming better equipped and supplied. But it faces more obstacles than just being outnumbered. Ukraine is a vast country. The frontline stretches 1,300km and Ukrainian forces are so thinly stretched that there is little opportunity to rotate those units to the rear for training (or even rest) let alone concentrate forces for an offensive.
Unhappily, there are increasing warnings that Russia is about to extend the active frontline and the Ukrainians even further with new offensives north of Sumy and Chernihiv. This is Putin's plan: stretch Ukraine like an elastic band until it snaps. Trouble is he's running out of armour and mobile artillery: the weapons you need to force a breakthrough then exploit it. Meanwhile, Ukraine's long-range drones are becoming more and more effective. They have their own cruise missiles now and the Neptune missile too. All of these went into mass production late last year. Russian industry is going to face a very tough year.
Ukraine is winning this war of attrition, much as Frederick the Great did in the Seven Years War. Back then it took the death of the Tsar for that war to end. The same might be true this time too. However, as sanctions continue to bite and Ukraine's long-range war increases, that might not be necessary. Have faith, Ukraine is doing a great job.
Martin, the UK Intelligence services are massively intertwined with the US and we also have a number of US bases. If the US is travelling down the dark side as seems possible, it will impact our military. Think F35 and software updates, aircraft that have data-links ensuring seemless integration and communication, satellite systems that are inter-operable. That is without thinking too much about what is currently integrated.
As for Europe, they need to increase their material support to ensure it is sufficient for Ukraine to prevail on the battlefield and strengthen their negotiating position.
Thanks, Alan. Isn't it even worse than that since it affects the whole Five Eyes global network? Am I right in thinking that towards the end of Trump's first term, a lot of intel was with-held because of his behaviour (later fully justified by the Mar-a-Largo fiasco)? That's likely to happen again, surely? Would Trump be stupid enough to jeopardise the Five Eyes intel? Yes. Would Congress permit that? No one knows but that intel is too valuable to simply stop collecting right now.
Trump can try to stop F-35 sales and updates and also satellite coms. But has he the power to do so? He'll be putting a lot of US companies out of business if he does. The only beneficiaries of that would be the European aviation and space industries. Great for Europe, very bad for America.
I could go on forever about your comment on Europe needing to increase its material support. A lot of people post that same thought here. I think you are all using the wrong tense. Europe is already giving Ukraine the support it needs. The news of that support is not widely publicised, and, in Germany's case, I suspect Scholz was quite pleased it wasn't since he pushed through an enormous amount of aid with little publicity and less domestic controversy. Put simply, when was the last time everyone was aware Ukraine was not getting the aid it needed? It was this time last year, and that was because the Republicans in Congress stopped munitions supplies. Nothing to do with Europe at all but it was European nations who responded by sourcing fresh supplies and bringing even more munitions productions online both in Ukraine and across Europe. Ukraine now has almost all the shells it needs without relying upon the USA. And more munitions plants are coming on stream this year. Commitments were made 2-3 years ago to supply Ukraine with the battlefield armour it needs, the artillery it needs, the munitions it needs, the radars, the... the list is near endless. It took time to build the plants that build those weapons. There's no magic wand that can be waved to bring high-tech productions line equipped with specialist machine tool into existence overnight. You probably did not hear about all this because most reporters (and their readers) fell for simplistic often fact-free narratives. But it is something that should be celebrated. In real terms, European aid to Ukraine has already outstripped all the Lease-Lend aid sent to the Soviet Union in WWII.
Go back in time and build more air defense.
I fear many fail to see that the US is not just hostile to the post war rules based order, but has joined the side of the autocracies and may soon be sending military aid to Russia in support of what Trump/Vance will portray as a “just war” against the woke ideologies of Europe.
European democracies need to circle the wagons and plan for a long haul. Co-ordinated rearmament, independently controlled satellite intelligence gathering, independently controlled nukes, strict media regulation including banning social media that promotes disinformation, reform NATO (minus the US). Sadly, I fear the nature of liberal democracy will make such actions unlikely.
Our US congress would never fund Russia.
I hope you’re right
"Can people please, please, stop trying to force Ukraine to somehow try to work things out with Trump. He wishes ill on Ukraine and will do everything he can to help Putin."
FINALLY!! 👍👍👍
Phillips, how long will it be until the US stops sharing intelligence with Ukraine and starts sharing it with Russia? And if that does happen, to what degree are other (European) states able to step in to replace the US in this capacity?
Rutte’s statement was truly moronic. If Ukraine falls, Russia stands on the German border and the Italian one. Slovakia, Hungary and Austria will either switch sides or fall like dominos.
One of the biggest failures of not only Biden but also Pelosi and the entire Democratic Party was complete inaction (other than one disappointing hearing with Mueller) on the Russian collusion. Which was in fact an even bigger deal that January 6, since a government beholden to an unfriendly foreign power is worse than an authoritarian government. The Dems effectively ratified "Russia hoax" GOP narrative, and that's a big factor in lots of bad takes on the Oval Office meeting even from non-Republicans and, very importantly, foreign leaders. People come up with tortured explanations instead of acknowledging the simple truth that Trump has been in cahoots with Putin for at least a decade.
I agree with most of what you say. But it's not like the Dems didn't try. When the Attorney General announces that Mueller's report essentially exonerates Trump (before anybody else has seen he report) that is an effective propaganda tool. It ends the issue for about 70% of the country.
Mueller is the villain. He did a decent job with his investigation and report. He needed to resign in protest when his boss lied to the public. He gave only a whimper of feedback.
I mentioned the hearing in which they questioned Mueller. But that was very far from enough. To begin with, he 1) had a very narrow scope, i.e. only the presidential campaign itself, but not Trump's previous history with Russia or, very importantly, Trump's finances, 2) he operated under DOJ guidelines not allowing indictment of sitting president, and, most importantly, 3) he was limited strictly to prosecutable crimes, and it's not actually a crime for a presidential candidate to collaborate with a foreign government. The very appointment of a special counsel was basically a cover-up. Just like after 9/11, what we needed was the answers not to questions "who can we indict?" but "what happened, how it happened, and what can we do to prevent it from happening again?". We needed a 9/11 commission with broad subpoena powers, co-chaired, say, by Condi Rice and Leon Panetta. In early 2021 the Dems had full control of Congress and DOJ, Trump support was at the lowest point, and there was a potential conduct investigation not only of January 6, but of all things Trump. They could have built on Mueller Report and Senate Intelligence Committee report. They just need to look at Trump finances. But no, they decided Russian collusion was not nearly as important as January 6.
It's amazing that serious people still deny reality almost 8 years since Trump all but admitted that he effectively promised Putin to lift sanctions under the Magnitsky Act in exchange for help against Hillary.
Andrew, it will continue as denial is more comfortable than seeing the ugly truth and all its consequences. But the less is simple. Believe people when they tell you who they are.
I do.
Kaja Kallas has been a very strong voice in support of Ukraine for years now, beginning when she was prime minister of Estonia. She has seen very clearly what needs to be done, as do the rest of the Baltics. Maybe she reads you, Phillips, would be good, but I don't think she needs priming.
a few good points, norway will no longer supply fuel to the american fleet, germany has begun to manafacture tarus missiles, sweeden has placed an order for their grippen fighters to be supplied with them, now the bad news, it seems as if america has stopped all military aid to ukraine, this was posted on x by a realible scource
In late February, Thomas Friedman wrote an opinion column for the NY Times in which he noted that:
"A serious U.S. president would recognize that Putin is playing a very weak hand that we should exploit. As The Economist noted last week, most of Russia’s “gains were in the first weeks of the war. In April 2022, following Russia’s retreat from the north of Ukraine, it controlled 19.6 percent of Ukrainian territory; its casualties (dead and wounded) were perhaps 20,000. Today Russia occupies 19.2 percent and its casualties are 800,000, reckon British sources. … More than half of the 7,300 tanks [Russia] had in storage are gone. Of those that remain, only 500 can be reconditioned quickly. By April, Russia may run out of its T-80 tanks. Last year it lost twice as many artillery systems as in the preceding two years. … The reallocation of resources from productive sectors to the military complex has fueled double-digit inflation. Interest rates are 21 percent.”
If this were poker, Putin is holding a pair of twos and bluffing by going all in. Trump, instead of calling Putin’s bluff, is saying, “I think I’ll fold.”
Stewart Raynor
Phillips, I was hoping you were wrong about Trump. But you seem to have been proven right.
Was I the only one that heard J.D. Vance laughing multiple times anytime a reporter asked Zelenskyy a condescending question or anytime Trump answered a question by undermining Zelenskyy’s arguments?
18:47 I hear JD laughing at the question about Zelenskyy’s suit.
21:51 “What gave you the moral conviction to re-engage with Putin” JD laughs.
23:16 “I think he’s dressed beautifully.” JD laughs.
29:57 “Putin and Zelenskyy do not like each other.” JD laughs.
39:11 Following a Polish reporter’s question about Trump being too aligned with Putin: “I’m not aligned with Putin.” JD laughs.
https://youtu.be/7pxbGjvcdyY?si=9KE_4x6jXcHc3ywl
Also, am I the only one that sees the irony that many MAGA supporters believe Yanukovych was ousted in a CIA-directed color revolution, and now Trump is trying to get Zelenskyy to resign contrary to both Ukrainian law and the will of the Ukrainian people?
Rutte is afraid for his job, Starner thinks he is Churchill, so that leaves us Macron and most of all Merz (and rising SPD-star Klingbeil)
Ahem, https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/macron-talks-about-new-mission-to-ease-relations-between-ukraine-and-us/ar-AA1A408U
"French President Emmanuel Macron has set a goal to revive dialogue between the Ukrainian and US authorities, despite the rift between the leaders of the two nations, Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Donald Trump, on Friday at the White House. He is confident that distancing from Kyiv does not align with Washington’s interests, according to Macron’s interview with La Tribune Dimanche."
So Merz is the last man standing.
It looks like a bad peace will be forced on Ukraine. Biden was the only person who could have prevented this outcome.
Of course Zelensky can refuse to sign the deal.
I'm sure he will. It would be national suicide for Ukraine. And once he refuses, Europe will finally have to make a very important decision.
I believe that we have seen yesterday is Trump's reaction to Zelensky having refused the Trump-mandated national suicide deal.
I agree that Europe has to make a very important decision. The problem is that too few people are paying enough attention to what is going on. It looks to me like no decision is going to be taken at this time. That of course is a decision in itself — a decision that is very likely to have terrible consequences.
They'll still have to. Europe will fail in its own newly announced effort to negotiate a non-suicidal deal for Ukraine (since it won't be acceptable to Russia), Ukraine will refuse whatever Trump and Putin will demand from them, Trump will completely cut off Ukraine, Zelensky will announce fight to the death, and Europe will have to deal with the fact that Ukrainian defeat will have horrible consequences for Europe (the least bad of which will be an unprecedented flood of refugees, or at least unprecedented since the mass movement of Germans from the eastern regions in 1945).
Sooner or later the Europeans will be forced to deal with the simple reality that there's no clever diplomatic formula for sustainable peace in Europe, no Solomonic compromise. It will only be possible when either the Ukrainians give up their nationhood or the Russians give up their imperial dreams. The former will never happen (the Europeans may want to consult the Brits about their experience with the Irish), and even if Ukraine is completely occupied, there will be an insurgency (like in 1944-1954). The latter won't happen until the Russians take a very good beating.
I agree that the current policy of procrastinating doesn't solve the problem of having to face these realities eventually.
I just don't trust our politicians to come to their senses anytime soon.
At least not without a lot of poking-with-cluesticks. I’m currently thinking about how I might be able to organize a good bit of that.
One thing the EU can...and should do...is confiscate as much of the Russian funds, now frozen in EU banks, as possible and give them to Ukraine. Anything the US controls will probably be released to Russia by Trump so that is out of reach. That's enough funding to keep Ukraine afloat...at least economically...through the rest of this year, perhaps beyond. As much of that money should be spent in Europe, not the US.
I hope that the Europeans ban Twitter/X as soon as possible. It is basically a recruiting tool for Neo-fascism. I don't think most people understand how effective a weapon this is. Because if they did, it would be banned and most parts of the world.
Many are understandably angry at Rutte for putting the onus on Zelensky to fix the relationship with Washington. From what I've seen from former diplomats and foreign policy analysts he is not an outlier. The ex-government figures from G.B. and the U.S. (I think I sampled half a dozen) are all dedicated to a negotiated deal and Trump's leadership is the only option. They know how horrible Trump & Vance are, they evidently see no possibility that Europe can provide alternative resources and leadership.
The analysis and opinions we see here on substack do not reflect the establishment view that appears on broader media.
Ian Bremmer had a balanced take, IMO. He has always been a bit of a defeatist, but he at least retains a sliver of hope that Europe might rally.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXoreH_5coA
I think what we are seeing is that those who want to see a negotiated resolution don't actually much care what the deal looks like. Oh, they themselves have offered very attractive resolutions with strong security guarantees. But the fact that Trump is prioritizing an economic lifeline to Putin, making a peace far more dangerous, gives nobody pause. Nothing matters other than getting an armistice. And I'm including the most sophisticated thought leaders.