Thanks for this review. Perhaps a little qualification to the impression often conveyed in the anglo-saxon press that France is all talk and little action. Macron is certainly strong on rhetoric and he made a powerful speech last week. He was also, back in 2018, the first European leader to articulate a strategic vision to counter the Russian threat. Sure, France could have done more since then but it would be inaccurate to claim that it has done little. One of Macron's closest advisors, Sebastien Lecornu, who was appointed defence minister after Macron was re-elected in 2022, and who is now serving under his fourth prime minister, says little, even to the French press, but when he does speak, he is concise and to the point, like for instance this morning when he announced that France will use €195 million of interest on frozen Russian assets to provide Ukraine with shells and bombs for the French Mirage jets now in service there. He is well respected by the French military establishment and has been quietly managing the big increase in France's defence budget. More generally, the French army is the second largest in Europe, with 200k active troops, just a few thousand short of the the Polish army, is well organised, equipped and commanded and with combat experience, in Africa particularly. The German army is smaller, for a country with a larger population, requires a manpower boost and extensive reorganisation. The UK army, however competent, is smaller still. France was the first to volunteer to put boots on the ground in Ukraine if security guarantees can be negotiated. It's also worth noting that Putin singled out France for criticism after Macron's speech on Wednesday, comparing him, with a smirk, to Napoleon and his disastrous retreat from Moscow in 1812 - a sign perhaps that he takes seriously the French stance on security guarantees and extending its nuclear umbrella, which, unlike the UK nuclear deterrent, is totally independent of the USA.
I still don't dare hope that Germany will do the right thing, after so many years of not doing anything (except buying more Russian gas, back then). So, only mildly agreeing that Merz' election _could_ be a very pivotal moment.
Regarding Poland, I think it's even more important that it says things that other states don't (yet) dare to. By bringing them to light, it half-normalises them.
And regarding Italy, I'm not sure why you would have expected Melloni to side more with Trump. Is it because "populist", or "far-right"? Are all right-of-center parties automatically bad? Just curious.
The election of a rentier, revolving door, neoliberal, BlackRock lobbyist as Chancellor is pivotal all right. Disastrous for Ukraine and the rest of us, but certainly pivotal.
Europe needs action now and if Merz’s rhetoric and spending plans are real, they can be followed by others including the UK and Canada to bolster defense spending which will also boost their ailing economies. It can be turned into a win-win for Europe if they have the courage and vision.
But what I find missing in this discourse is the inclusion of Czech manufacturing base which is large and sophisticated as well as a well trained military (at least historically).
What I worry about is the US under Trump trying to take over Canada and Greenland. That would certainly trigger Article 5 under NATO.
Hegseth is moving rapidly to purge the military of honorable leaders.
I think a lot of people still don't recognize how far we've moved down the dictatorship hole.
Still, I cling to my perception that most of the people in the military are not going to do violence to Greenlanders, Ukrainians or Americans. I don't believe the rot is that deep. I know quite a few Trump supporters. None of them are remotely inclined to support violence. Most Trump supporters hated Jan 6. The rhetoric supporting Jan 6 is largely just to trigger libs.
Oh, and since when does a declaration of war matter since 1964 and the Tonkin incident which we now know never really happened (meaning the attack on US naval ships which was the predicate).
I believe it creates enough room for maneuver that leaders up and down the chain of command will refuse. They can find whack jobs to install at the top, but to build an entire chain of command is something else entirely.
That said, I can’t believe a draft dodger who insults war heroes and injured soldiers has so much support from thearmed forces.
I wish I could agree with you…but what I am seeing tells me that this is somewhere down the road before the 2026 mid terms. The question is how far down does the Trump purge go? Yes, I can see many if not most officers refusing that unlawful order. At that point, does it become a second civil war here in the US? Very easily could be.
Paul, it certainly would. But my imagination fails when it comes to the HOW. First Marine Division marching up to the Windsor Ontario bridge to face Canadian artillery? 101st Airborne parachuting into Greenland? Even Trump would Blanche at the optics.
The UK government has a golden opportunity to establish seriously enhanced defence and infrastructure investment whilst using the justification of the changed national security landscape to break its own fiscal rules and manifesto tax commitments. Even Chamberlain funded rearmament, just in case his appeasement failed.
Where do you live Simon? Our infrastructure is awful, our public services are in a terrible state and the post-covid post-sanctions inflation has reduced real wages considerably. Your 'golden opportunity' to squander billions on an unwinnable war a thousand miles away would be a disaster if taken.
Worst still our arms procurement processes are nowhere near fit for purpose (see the Ajax APV, F-35 money-pit & the mothballed aircraft carriers for just 3 examples of the waste). We can't do anything at all without squandering billions - see HS2 and the new Thames tunnel that has already wasted £1.2bn on planning alone.
We're just a badly behaved, yapping Jack Russell these days - able to annoy and give a nasty bite perhaps, but in real trouble if someone big just puts their boot through it.
Wait Adrian, which is it? Do you care about Ukrainians oh so much? Or are a few quid in your pocket more important to you? I find your arguments rather contradictory and disingenuous.
The Russian information operations around this are insane - not only your commentor above re Kursk withdrawal, but the effectiveness of using Western media to amplify and spread the narrative "Ukraine is losing, defeat is inevitable". Maybe its the lack of Russo literacy or tight information control but Russia's waning sources of national power routinely escapes critical examination
Re the messaging, the West has a massive, relentless propaganda machine - read 'Manufacturing Consent' if you've not done so already.
And if you want tight information control - try to find me anyone or anywhere in the West who has attempted a serious estimation of Ukrainian losses. Certainly the Professor hasn't - see his latest Atlantic piece for yet another pitiful example. This is perhaps the most serious marker of the progress of this war and it's prospects - but it's steadfastly ignored in the Western press and think-tank complex.
Please stop the trolling. We've seen in the New York Times and Fox and most of the other news for a couple of years how the Ukrainian force lack manpower and is collapsing, and still the Russians haven't even taken the whole of Donbas yet. That should be proof enough that you are reading the reality upside down or deliberately spreading Trump/Putin narratives.
Could you comment on the Sky Shield proposal, that the EU provides air cover over Kyiv and Odessa plus 3 nuke plants with 120 fighters to bolster defense against Russian missiles and drone attacks?
I'm glad the English King is still hosting his fellow King for a state visit. (Although I read somewhere it was downgraded to a lunch.) The protests could be quite something.
If the state visit does eventually go ahead, which cannot now be a given, then the demo in London (like last time) will be enormous fun. I’ll be there… I wouldnt advise Vance to turn up, he’ll get more than a banana milkshake lobbed at him. More like an Anglo Saxon smack in the chops.
hit on the nose of a mule with a two by four said kellog of ukraine, then trump removes all radar from american arms including the f16s, leaving ukraine without air defence, trump is just plain evil, he has to be in putins pocket
Their logistics is getting harder. In part because of spring thaw, but also because of Russian movements. This may not end well. But it may not matter that much strategically now that Trump has clearly sided with Putin, and there's no hope that he will get angry at Putin not agreeing to a ceasefire until he gets Sudzha.
But it is suspicious that the withdrawal of intelligence sharing US-Ukraine coincides with the intensified Russian attacks, which must have been prepared before the cut off of intelligence was declared.
Looks as if Trump directly is acting after Moscows order.
Thanks for the accurate reporting on the situation in Kursk. One might believe anything when reading/listening to the US media. I think we are in a critical phase right now. The suspension of US battlefield intel and and resupply will create a problem for Ukrainian forces, in the short term for sure. The next 30 days will be a critical adjustment period. Now is the time to make those adjustments. The Russians will try to to capitalize on the Opening Trump has given them. They will be on the attack and vulnerable as a result.
I think the author does the UK an immense disservice. We have no border with Russia, we were never occupied by Russia, and yet from day 1 we have fought the good fight. Much of what we do structurally is embedded within joint systems with the US. So we cannot simply give the US a V sign. We need to understand how far they will go, and what we can salvage of our joint systems.
As Starmer showed in his subtle denunciation of Vance, we know we are dealing with an evil clown show, but deal with it we must. Maybe we may be able to act as some sort of break or counter balance, maybe we can extricate ourselves more cleanly from the US in ways beneficial to Ukraine. What I see is a nation swallowing its pride to try to get an insight into a potential enemy.
So, a million miles removed from Phillips’ “all Brits are posh villains lost in the past”.
That's a straw man, Phillips never said that. Were you stung by his criticism of Brexit or of 'special relationship' fantasy or something else he said? Whatever it is, listen to his criticism and do some serious reflection. I used to be something of a peacenik, that position is no longer credible either.
We are in a new world, the USA is now hostile to liberal democracy and therefore to the UK, the EU and its member states (Hungary excepted) and Ukraine. Our 'joint systems with the US' are now a huge danger - fancy sharing intelligence with Trump or Vance or Gabbard? I wouldn't. I'm sure the realities of disengaging are far more complex and difficult than most of us can imagine. But Trump's behaviour towards Ukraine has been that of a loan shark towards a distressed 'client'. He could do the same to us in the UK if we let him
I'm also an ex-peacenik. Well I’m still all in favour of peace, but I’m now insisting that where (like in the neighbourhood of Putin’s Russia) true peace, in the sense of the peoples actually getting along with each other and not being a threat to each other, isn’t available, we must instead settle for establishing credible deterrence to prevent war.
"As Starmer showed in his subtle denunciation of Vance, we know we are dealing with an evil clown show, but deal with it we must."
My window into British elite thinking comes from watching foreign policy pundits, former diplomats and former gov officials appearing on youtube channels. I agree that they see the evil and foolishness inherent in the right wing zealots running America. Yet they simply will not break with Trump's peace process. I'm talking 100%. There are rational reasons for trying to string Trump along for a while. But I'm seeing an irrational hope that somehow they can steer the process and get to an acceptable outcome. There is a lingering Stockholm Syndrome - or something similar.
For British elites the 'special relationship' with the US is a precious consolation prize for the loss of empire and great power status. The bottom has now fallen out of their world. They are in the bargaining stage of grief.
Fairish enough points David, but that is not a quote from the Prof, so you lose credibility misquoting like that. I’m happy, so far, with Starmers approach , and it has to be nuanced, but ffs no needless prevarication.
There is an article in the Sunday Times today implying that the U.K. is buying time , as Phillips thinks possible. Also building a good relationship between the U.K. and U.S. defence secretaries. This seems at least worth trying
The new Russian salient is remarkably narrow. Supplying down it must be entertaining. On the same line, without the Kerch bridge, Crimea is nearly indefensible.
Merz must have the released the debt brake before he takes office, as his coalition lacks the votes to do so afterward. Though he might pick up a few Green votes, as the Green position on the war is mixed.
Even if all Greens vote with CDU and SPD, they will not have enough votes in the Bundestag after the new Bundestag is constituted. It has to be done before then.
They want to get a ceasefire by any means as quickly as possible. This is primarily to deliver a diplomatic “win” to their electorate. They could care less about Ukrainian national interests. European security and stability are unimportant to them. They want out of NATO. They assign little value to an actual peace deal and even less to a lasting peace deal. They just want a ceasefire now. Anyone in the way of “ceasefire” or “ now” is the enemy. They don’t care that Ukraine has years of experience with broken ceasefires and bad peace deals. Their message is “this time it’s different”. The beauty of the message is that if you buy it, the past becomes irrelevant.
This is why Trump cut off American intelligence and arms to Ukraine. Better relations with Russia would be nice but that’s not the main thing. The main thing is, ceasefire now, don’t care what comes after. So pressure Ukraine. The “proof” the pressure worked will be a “deal” giving a exploitative if not simply colonial Ukraine rare minerals development agreement to US big business. The US government won’t be obliged to do anything to protect Ukraine and the Ukrainians will sign it because they “have to get a deal”.
This is why Vance spit on the proposition of a limited European peacekeeping force in Ukraine. This is why Kellogg this week said that Ukraine needed to be “Hit in the head with a two-by-four like a stubborn mule”. This is why Rubio this week called Ukraine an obstacle to peace.
A sovereign Ukraine insisting on security stands in the way of a quick ceasefire engineered by the Trump administration. Therefore, Ukraine is a fair target for every pressure tactic the American state might deploy against a small country short of war. In the view of the White House, Ukrainians and Ukrainian national interests are orders of magnitude more expendable than federal workers’, or cross-aisle legislation, or respect for constitutional checks and balances. The Ukrainians are foreigners that are safe to hate just like “illegal” immigrants. There is absolutely no down side in lying to the Ukrainians, or in lying to the US public about the Ukrainians.
Well, yes. He has quite an established track record in foreign relations! From his first term, his deals with the Taliban and North Korea come to mind. Agree to whatever, proclaim yourself a genius negotiator, and move on.
The photograph in the article is telling. Where's Waldo? Scholz is nearly visible, hanging out in the background. He will soon be replaced by a more capable Merz. The economical effect Merz and Von der Leyen have on the international markets are already there. Nearly 800 billion euro will be invested in the European defense industry, leading to a rise of shares of Rheinmetall, Thales, Saab and Leonardo. The euro is also on the rise. It's a pity that the UK defense industry is out of the EU, but they will surely profit as well from a Europe first defense policy. On the other side of the Atlantic, we find a Mad King rambling about the economy, whilst the US consumer confidence and the consumer spending in january are plummeting. Perhaps one can fool the MAGA's, but in the long run you can't fool the economy.
It's only been a couple of weeks since Vance and Hegseth shocked Europeans leaders to their core with their inflamatory dialogue. Considering how long Europe usually dithers over the most mundane issues, their response, in terms of speed, has been remarkable. Of course, when the "Sword of Damocles" (Trumpocles?) hangs over your head, it tends to concentrate your attention wonderfully. Europe has two massive interconnected problems that it must find answers for simultaneously: 1. what to do about their own defense and 2. how to help Ukraine continue the war to a satisfactory conclusion. Failure to help Ukraine means that the "wolf" will be at the doorstep, which will further complicate problem #1. Failure to address, adequately, the issues of European defense means that it's likely that Ukraine will fall, which, again, brings us back to issue #1. "Between a rock and a hard place" covers the situation nicely. The one positive in their favour is that Russia is on the ropes economically and exhausted, militarily. Perhaps the best one can hope for now is that Russia will be forced to agree to a ceasefire. This will give Putin breathing space but also, and I think more importantly, give Europe and Ukraine time to more effectively prepare for any resumption of hostilities. Lots can happen during a ceasefire: Putin could die or be overthrown, Democrats in the US could re-take the House and control of funding that might lead to continued financial support (not likely, I admit), Europe will finally agree to release the impounded Russian funds to Ukraine (roughly $221.5 billion), any or all of these things are possible. The one thing that must not happen is to allow the Trump regime to dictate a peace or ceasefire. At this point the US should be made irrelevant to European and Ukrainian security, and the sooner, the better.
Putin won't agree to a ceasefire. If he'd had the sense to, he would have done so long, long ago, and he has a record of breaking every ceasefire he signs.
Zelenskyy has his number. Zelenskyy said "Let's start with an agreement not to attack civilian infrastructure!" Easy because Ukraine already doesn't attack civilian infrastructure. Putin will refuse to agree to this and so there will be no ceasefire.
Thanks for this review. Perhaps a little qualification to the impression often conveyed in the anglo-saxon press that France is all talk and little action. Macron is certainly strong on rhetoric and he made a powerful speech last week. He was also, back in 2018, the first European leader to articulate a strategic vision to counter the Russian threat. Sure, France could have done more since then but it would be inaccurate to claim that it has done little. One of Macron's closest advisors, Sebastien Lecornu, who was appointed defence minister after Macron was re-elected in 2022, and who is now serving under his fourth prime minister, says little, even to the French press, but when he does speak, he is concise and to the point, like for instance this morning when he announced that France will use €195 million of interest on frozen Russian assets to provide Ukraine with shells and bombs for the French Mirage jets now in service there. He is well respected by the French military establishment and has been quietly managing the big increase in France's defence budget. More generally, the French army is the second largest in Europe, with 200k active troops, just a few thousand short of the the Polish army, is well organised, equipped and commanded and with combat experience, in Africa particularly. The German army is smaller, for a country with a larger population, requires a manpower boost and extensive reorganisation. The UK army, however competent, is smaller still. France was the first to volunteer to put boots on the ground in Ukraine if security guarantees can be negotiated. It's also worth noting that Putin singled out France for criticism after Macron's speech on Wednesday, comparing him, with a smirk, to Napoleon and his disastrous retreat from Moscow in 1812 - a sign perhaps that he takes seriously the French stance on security guarantees and extending its nuclear umbrella, which, unlike the UK nuclear deterrent, is totally independent of the USA.
I still don't dare hope that Germany will do the right thing, after so many years of not doing anything (except buying more Russian gas, back then). So, only mildly agreeing that Merz' election _could_ be a very pivotal moment.
Regarding Poland, I think it's even more important that it says things that other states don't (yet) dare to. By bringing them to light, it half-normalises them.
And regarding Italy, I'm not sure why you would have expected Melloni to side more with Trump. Is it because "populist", or "far-right"? Are all right-of-center parties automatically bad? Just curious.
Well, her party as a whole seems to be far more pro-Russian (and pro-Trump) than she is. She could have gone down that route more than she has.
Her party is the direct lineal descendant of Mussolini's. That worried people!
Ah, I see. Interesting, then I hope she won't lose the party leadership.
I hope she is not only doing lip service, like what Trump does, just a bit more cleverly than he is.
The election of a rentier, revolving door, neoliberal, BlackRock lobbyist as Chancellor is pivotal all right. Disastrous for Ukraine and the rest of us, but certainly pivotal.
Europe needs action now and if Merz’s rhetoric and spending plans are real, they can be followed by others including the UK and Canada to bolster defense spending which will also boost their ailing economies. It can be turned into a win-win for Europe if they have the courage and vision.
But what I find missing in this discourse is the inclusion of Czech manufacturing base which is large and sophisticated as well as a well trained military (at least historically).
What I worry about is the US under Trump trying to take over Canada and Greenland. That would certainly trigger Article 5 under NATO.
If Congress does not declare war, the military should disobey unlawful orders, even from the commander in chief. It is not a near term risk.
Hegseth is moving rapidly to purge the military of honorable leaders.
I think a lot of people still don't recognize how far we've moved down the dictatorship hole.
Still, I cling to my perception that most of the people in the military are not going to do violence to Greenlanders, Ukrainians or Americans. I don't believe the rot is that deep. I know quite a few Trump supporters. None of them are remotely inclined to support violence. Most Trump supporters hated Jan 6. The rhetoric supporting Jan 6 is largely just to trigger libs.
Oh, and since when does a declaration of war matter since 1964 and the Tonkin incident which we now know never really happened (meaning the attack on US naval ships which was the predicate).
I believe it creates enough room for maneuver that leaders up and down the chain of command will refuse. They can find whack jobs to install at the top, but to build an entire chain of command is something else entirely.
That said, I can’t believe a draft dodger who insults war heroes and injured soldiers has so much support from thearmed forces.
I wish I could agree with you…but what I am seeing tells me that this is somewhere down the road before the 2026 mid terms. The question is how far down does the Trump purge go? Yes, I can see many if not most officers refusing that unlawful order. At that point, does it become a second civil war here in the US? Very easily could be.
Paul, it certainly would. But my imagination fails when it comes to the HOW. First Marine Division marching up to the Windsor Ontario bridge to face Canadian artillery? 101st Airborne parachuting into Greenland? Even Trump would Blanche at the optics.
Trump does not care about optics at all! Frankly, the Canadians being on home turf would turn it into a bloodbath.
The UK government has a golden opportunity to establish seriously enhanced defence and infrastructure investment whilst using the justification of the changed national security landscape to break its own fiscal rules and manifesto tax commitments. Even Chamberlain funded rearmament, just in case his appeasement failed.
Where do you live Simon? Our infrastructure is awful, our public services are in a terrible state and the post-covid post-sanctions inflation has reduced real wages considerably. Your 'golden opportunity' to squander billions on an unwinnable war a thousand miles away would be a disaster if taken.
Worst still our arms procurement processes are nowhere near fit for purpose (see the Ajax APV, F-35 money-pit & the mothballed aircraft carriers for just 3 examples of the waste). We can't do anything at all without squandering billions - see HS2 and the new Thames tunnel that has already wasted £1.2bn on planning alone.
We're just a badly behaved, yapping Jack Russell these days - able to annoy and give a nasty bite perhaps, but in real trouble if someone big just puts their boot through it.
Yes, better do the infrastructure now, because when the Russians arrive in London they definitely will not care.
Or you can help Ukraine now and do the infrastructure when the Russians are no longer hungry for war with the West after their huge losses in Ukraine.
Difficult choice?
Wait Adrian, which is it? Do you care about Ukrainians oh so much? Or are a few quid in your pocket more important to you? I find your arguments rather contradictory and disingenuous.
The Russian information operations around this are insane - not only your commentor above re Kursk withdrawal, but the effectiveness of using Western media to amplify and spread the narrative "Ukraine is losing, defeat is inevitable". Maybe its the lack of Russo literacy or tight information control but Russia's waning sources of national power routinely escapes critical examination
And seem to be routinely digested and internalised by Western commentators (most recently over the weekend in Australia, see https://www.thesaturdaypaper.com.au/share/20316/2lGyRwqA)!
The West still doesn't seem to have a counter for this.
Over the past week or two I noticed on Facebook that some Fox watchers that I personally know suddenly started talking about "peace" a lot.
Re the messaging, the West has a massive, relentless propaganda machine - read 'Manufacturing Consent' if you've not done so already.
And if you want tight information control - try to find me anyone or anywhere in the West who has attempted a serious estimation of Ukrainian losses. Certainly the Professor hasn't - see his latest Atlantic piece for yet another pitiful example. This is perhaps the most serious marker of the progress of this war and it's prospects - but it's steadfastly ignored in the Western press and think-tank complex.
Please stop the trolling. We've seen in the New York Times and Fox and most of the other news for a couple of years how the Ukrainian force lack manpower and is collapsing, and still the Russians haven't even taken the whole of Donbas yet. That should be proof enough that you are reading the reality upside down or deliberately spreading Trump/Putin narratives.
Adrian, please return to your spider hole and leave us alone. Thank you.
Could you comment on the Sky Shield proposal, that the EU provides air cover over Kyiv and Odessa plus 3 nuke plants with 120 fighters to bolster defense against Russian missiles and drone attacks?
I'm glad the English King is still hosting his fellow King for a state visit. (Although I read somewhere it was downgraded to a lunch.) The protests could be quite something.
If the state visit does eventually go ahead, which cannot now be a given, then the demo in London (like last time) will be enormous fun. I’ll be there… I wouldnt advise Vance to turn up, he’ll get more than a banana milkshake lobbed at him. More like an Anglo Saxon smack in the chops.
Are foreigners welcome at such a demo? It's a long time since I last visited the UK.
Absolutely! Come over!
as Trump said just before Jan 6, "It's gonna be wild!"
I saw reports/rumors that Russian targeting has improving, suggesting that Musk may have given Russia access to Starlink.
hit on the nose of a mule with a two by four said kellog of ukraine, then trump removes all radar from american arms including the f16s, leaving ukraine without air defence, trump is just plain evil, he has to be in putins pocket
I have just read that Ukraine has pulled out of Kursk
Latest statement is that the Ukrainians have no intention to withdraw from Kursk.
Their logistics is getting harder. In part because of spring thaw, but also because of Russian movements. This may not end well. But it may not matter that much strategically now that Trump has clearly sided with Putin, and there's no hope that he will get angry at Putin not agreeing to a ceasefire until he gets Sudzha.
they are out
Post had been withdrawn, so possibly fake news
But it is suspicious that the withdrawal of intelligence sharing US-Ukraine coincides with the intensified Russian attacks, which must have been prepared before the cut off of intelligence was declared.
Looks as if Trump directly is acting after Moscows order.
Well, it seems to be true after all https://open.substack.com/pub/shankarnarayan/p/syrski-pulls-troops-out-of-kursk
Thanks for the accurate reporting on the situation in Kursk. One might believe anything when reading/listening to the US media. I think we are in a critical phase right now. The suspension of US battlefield intel and and resupply will create a problem for Ukrainian forces, in the short term for sure. The next 30 days will be a critical adjustment period. Now is the time to make those adjustments. The Russians will try to to capitalize on the Opening Trump has given them. They will be on the attack and vulnerable as a result.
I think the author does the UK an immense disservice. We have no border with Russia, we were never occupied by Russia, and yet from day 1 we have fought the good fight. Much of what we do structurally is embedded within joint systems with the US. So we cannot simply give the US a V sign. We need to understand how far they will go, and what we can salvage of our joint systems.
As Starmer showed in his subtle denunciation of Vance, we know we are dealing with an evil clown show, but deal with it we must. Maybe we may be able to act as some sort of break or counter balance, maybe we can extricate ourselves more cleanly from the US in ways beneficial to Ukraine. What I see is a nation swallowing its pride to try to get an insight into a potential enemy.
So, a million miles removed from Phillips’ “all Brits are posh villains lost in the past”.
“all Brits are posh villains lost in the past”.
That's a straw man, Phillips never said that. Were you stung by his criticism of Brexit or of 'special relationship' fantasy or something else he said? Whatever it is, listen to his criticism and do some serious reflection. I used to be something of a peacenik, that position is no longer credible either.
We are in a new world, the USA is now hostile to liberal democracy and therefore to the UK, the EU and its member states (Hungary excepted) and Ukraine. Our 'joint systems with the US' are now a huge danger - fancy sharing intelligence with Trump or Vance or Gabbard? I wouldn't. I'm sure the realities of disengaging are far more complex and difficult than most of us can imagine. But Trump's behaviour towards Ukraine has been that of a loan shark towards a distressed 'client'. He could do the same to us in the UK if we let him
I'm also an ex-peacenik. Well I’m still all in favour of peace, but I’m now insisting that where (like in the neighbourhood of Putin’s Russia) true peace, in the sense of the peoples actually getting along with each other and not being a threat to each other, isn’t available, we must instead settle for establishing credible deterrence to prevent war.
"As Starmer showed in his subtle denunciation of Vance, we know we are dealing with an evil clown show, but deal with it we must."
My window into British elite thinking comes from watching foreign policy pundits, former diplomats and former gov officials appearing on youtube channels. I agree that they see the evil and foolishness inherent in the right wing zealots running America. Yet they simply will not break with Trump's peace process. I'm talking 100%. There are rational reasons for trying to string Trump along for a while. But I'm seeing an irrational hope that somehow they can steer the process and get to an acceptable outcome. There is a lingering Stockholm Syndrome - or something similar.
For British elites the 'special relationship' with the US is a precious consolation prize for the loss of empire and great power status. The bottom has now fallen out of their world. They are in the bargaining stage of grief.
Ruth Windle
Keir Starmer would do well to remember that bridges are there to be walked on
Fairish enough points David, but that is not a quote from the Prof, so you lose credibility misquoting like that. I’m happy, so far, with Starmers approach , and it has to be nuanced, but ffs no needless prevarication.
There is an article in the Sunday Times today implying that the U.K. is buying time , as Phillips thinks possible. Also building a good relationship between the U.K. and U.S. defence secretaries. This seems at least worth trying
The new Russian salient is remarkably narrow. Supplying down it must be entertaining. On the same line, without the Kerch bridge, Crimea is nearly indefensible.
Merz must have the released the debt brake before he takes office, as his coalition lacks the votes to do so afterward. Though he might pick up a few Green votes, as the Green position on the war is mixed.
Even if all Greens vote with CDU and SPD, they will not have enough votes in the Bundestag after the new Bundestag is constituted. It has to be done before then.
The greens are more pro-Ukraine than any other party in Germany.
Excuse the excessive quote. Stefan Korshak's reading of the Trump admin is so perfect.
https://substack.com/home/post/p-158675894
They want to get a ceasefire by any means as quickly as possible. This is primarily to deliver a diplomatic “win” to their electorate. They could care less about Ukrainian national interests. European security and stability are unimportant to them. They want out of NATO. They assign little value to an actual peace deal and even less to a lasting peace deal. They just want a ceasefire now. Anyone in the way of “ceasefire” or “ now” is the enemy. They don’t care that Ukraine has years of experience with broken ceasefires and bad peace deals. Their message is “this time it’s different”. The beauty of the message is that if you buy it, the past becomes irrelevant.
This is why Trump cut off American intelligence and arms to Ukraine. Better relations with Russia would be nice but that’s not the main thing. The main thing is, ceasefire now, don’t care what comes after. So pressure Ukraine. The “proof” the pressure worked will be a “deal” giving a exploitative if not simply colonial Ukraine rare minerals development agreement to US big business. The US government won’t be obliged to do anything to protect Ukraine and the Ukrainians will sign it because they “have to get a deal”.
This is why Vance spit on the proposition of a limited European peacekeeping force in Ukraine. This is why Kellogg this week said that Ukraine needed to be “Hit in the head with a two-by-four like a stubborn mule”. This is why Rubio this week called Ukraine an obstacle to peace.
A sovereign Ukraine insisting on security stands in the way of a quick ceasefire engineered by the Trump administration. Therefore, Ukraine is a fair target for every pressure tactic the American state might deploy against a small country short of war. In the view of the White House, Ukrainians and Ukrainian national interests are orders of magnitude more expendable than federal workers’, or cross-aisle legislation, or respect for constitutional checks and balances. The Ukrainians are foreigners that are safe to hate just like “illegal” immigrants. There is absolutely no down side in lying to the Ukrainians, or in lying to the US public about the Ukrainians.
Well, yes. He has quite an established track record in foreign relations! From his first term, his deals with the Taliban and North Korea come to mind. Agree to whatever, proclaim yourself a genius negotiator, and move on.
Agree 100%. Peace? My flaming arse.
The photograph in the article is telling. Where's Waldo? Scholz is nearly visible, hanging out in the background. He will soon be replaced by a more capable Merz. The economical effect Merz and Von der Leyen have on the international markets are already there. Nearly 800 billion euro will be invested in the European defense industry, leading to a rise of shares of Rheinmetall, Thales, Saab and Leonardo. The euro is also on the rise. It's a pity that the UK defense industry is out of the EU, but they will surely profit as well from a Europe first defense policy. On the other side of the Atlantic, we find a Mad King rambling about the economy, whilst the US consumer confidence and the consumer spending in january are plummeting. Perhaps one can fool the MAGA's, but in the long run you can't fool the economy.
It's only been a couple of weeks since Vance and Hegseth shocked Europeans leaders to their core with their inflamatory dialogue. Considering how long Europe usually dithers over the most mundane issues, their response, in terms of speed, has been remarkable. Of course, when the "Sword of Damocles" (Trumpocles?) hangs over your head, it tends to concentrate your attention wonderfully. Europe has two massive interconnected problems that it must find answers for simultaneously: 1. what to do about their own defense and 2. how to help Ukraine continue the war to a satisfactory conclusion. Failure to help Ukraine means that the "wolf" will be at the doorstep, which will further complicate problem #1. Failure to address, adequately, the issues of European defense means that it's likely that Ukraine will fall, which, again, brings us back to issue #1. "Between a rock and a hard place" covers the situation nicely. The one positive in their favour is that Russia is on the ropes economically and exhausted, militarily. Perhaps the best one can hope for now is that Russia will be forced to agree to a ceasefire. This will give Putin breathing space but also, and I think more importantly, give Europe and Ukraine time to more effectively prepare for any resumption of hostilities. Lots can happen during a ceasefire: Putin could die or be overthrown, Democrats in the US could re-take the House and control of funding that might lead to continued financial support (not likely, I admit), Europe will finally agree to release the impounded Russian funds to Ukraine (roughly $221.5 billion), any or all of these things are possible. The one thing that must not happen is to allow the Trump regime to dictate a peace or ceasefire. At this point the US should be made irrelevant to European and Ukrainian security, and the sooner, the better.
Putin won't agree to a ceasefire. If he'd had the sense to, he would have done so long, long ago, and he has a record of breaking every ceasefire he signs.
Zelenskyy has his number. Zelenskyy said "Let's start with an agreement not to attack civilian infrastructure!" Easy because Ukraine already doesn't attack civilian infrastructure. Putin will refuse to agree to this and so there will be no ceasefire.