The report is absolutely scathing. Some choice quotes:
But when the next crisis came, both the US and the governments of Europe fell back on old models of alliance leadership. Europe, as EU high representative for foreign affairs Josep Borrell loudly lamented prior to Russia’s invasion, is not really at the table when it comes to dealing with the Russia-Ukraine crisis. It has instead embarked on a process of vassalisation.
But “alone” had a very specific meaning for Scholz. He was unwilling to send Leopard 2 tanks to Ukraine unless the US also sent its own main battle tank, the M1 Abrams. It was not enough that other partners would send tanks or that the US might send other weapons. Like a scared child in a room full of strangers, Germany felt alone if Uncle Sam was not holding its hand.
Europeans’ lack of agency in the Russia-Ukraine crisis stems from this growing power imbalance in the Western alliance. Under the Biden administration, the US has become ever more willing to exercise this growing influence.
If by “scathing,” you mean one-sided reporting ignoring political context and contemporary events, then yes. It’s very"scathing".
By “scathing”, do you mean reiterating in extremist language the same thing European leaders have said over the past few months, that the EU relies to heavily on US military force?
Cool example of propagandizing old news. Making good news bad is your style.
You do know what ECFR is right?
Yes. An anti-atlanticist lobby group. They’re not neutral.
I agree with them when it comes to pushing European strategic autonomy but the reasoning they present here is bonkers. The purpose of this piece is to scare atlanticists out of atlanticism, not provide accurate analysis.
One has to be bonkers to think that the plain facts presented here is bonkers. Meanwhile, atlanticism is inherently premised on the idea of Europe being subjugated to US interest. The funny part is that US is clearly refocusing on China now which makes Europe far less important for US now. If republicans win the elections next year, which is likely, then Europe is going to discover the dangers of relying on US for protection very quickly.
Facts aren’t the issue, interpretation is.
No. Atlanticism is based on the idea of relying on the US as a military power, and, consequently, also relying on the US to be sane. It’s been a thing since WWII in the face of the cold war, a major dividing point between France and Germany (at least under CDU governments), but generally been on the decline since Iraq as Atlanticists realised that the US is not, in fact, sane.
If you really believe that Europe is “subjugated” I invite you to look at the trade wars we had with the US. Most were quite short indeed as the US caves pretty much instantly each time they are shown what we can do. Are those the actions of vassals?
“Focussing” doesn’t mean anything. Approach, confront, what? You never know with the US they don’t have a coherent foreign policy.
The US is reliant on European industry in so many ways it’s not even funny. The whole world is.
Not news. Already arrived, as said, beginning with Iraq and really driven home with Trump. Also, we’re not relying on their protection. Again: From what aliens is the US supposed to protect us. If anything is endangered on the military side then it’s resource imports, but not the continent, and even then you’d have to hit a fuckton of places at the same time for trade flow to not simply readjust, meanwhile making pretty much the whole world your enemy.
I live in Latinamerica and I have never seen any shit made in Europe except useless fancy shit, maybe you build some engine part or something? I wouldn’t dare to say the world is dependent on European industry, though, now China, we sure are dependent to them.
ASML
Ok, that’s true, but at the same time it’s not like it’s the only one and also it’s one thing. If we wouldn’t get couped every 5 second we could create a replacement.
We build the machines that you, and China, use to build stuff. We also make things which go into things that go into things. We build the measuring systems you use to calibrate measuring systems. You can also buy whole power plants, turn-key. We bore all your tunnels, build all your gondola systems and probably build your planes, and also trains (The ranking is Alstrom, the Chinese, then Stadler). We build pneumatic tube systems for your hospitals and produce the forceps your surgeons use.
We also do a lot of consumer stuff but I don’t know how popular it is outside of Europe. But I’d be surprised if you can’t find e.g. Bosch food processors all over the world. Or Siemens light bulbs. Have you ever used a BIC pen or lighter (or, of all things, surfboards yes they produce surfboards). Hardly “fancy shit”.
And that’s not including stuff produced all over the world by European companies, if e.g. BASF were to vanish over night every single economy in the world would collapse.
kkkkkkkk
What, surprised? They’ve been producing them for ages.
BTW, Argentina invented the ballpoint pen and Bics are produced either in Argentina or Brasil, lol.
John J. Loud patented it in 1888, the man was American. Those never took off, though, manufacturing wasn’t there yet it took 50 years so the second name you see listed as inventor is László Bíró, Hungarian… who fled to Argentina. 10 years after starting to produce his pens. Maybe read up on shit before you base your jingoism on it. Next thing you’re going to tell me is that Che is from Angola.
If you wonder how hard it is to make ballpoint pens: Very. It took China until 2017 to nail the requirements – it’s not that the concept is hard, but manufacturing at the required precision at scale is anything but easy.
When it comes to production I have no idea where you got Argentina from, BIC’s South American factories are in Brasil: Stationary, Lighters and Shavers in Manaus, Stationary in Rio.
Not actually sure whether they producing their own balls but they definitely produce their own razor blades. I mainly brought Bic up as an very good example of unfancy European engineering: Yes, you can get cheaper stuff, but you’re probably going to haul curses at it at some point in time, and end up spending more money because buying cheap is more expensive than buying once.
Worse, you could be buying Gillette or Wilkinson who only seem to produce good ole fashioned safety razor blades to make people think safety razors suck so they can sell more overpriced cartridge stuff. My Bic blades are 11ct a piece, I could use a fresh one every shave and still spend less than what those want for their seven-blade cartridges. That’s even true if you buy the cream of the cream, Japanese “let’s make the best possible product, not care about price” blades: Feather. 29ct a piece.
The interpretation is entirely correct. EU is subordinate to US in every practical way, and one has to be wilfully ignorant not to see that.
If by trade war you mean US cannibalizing Europe by luring what business is left to prop up its own failing economy then sure.
What interests has US actually caved on exactly?
Focusing means allocating resources towards Asia. Meanwhile, the fact that US does not have a coherent policy should itself be very worrisome for Europe. Having outsourced your security to an unstable and unreliable partner has put Europe into a rather precarious situation today.
It’s very clear that plenty of European states feel they need to have military parity with Russia. While the idea of a war with Russia is obviously insane, that doesn’t change the political reality of Europe. Given that Europe is in no position to match Russia militarily, it is therefore reliant on US for military strength.
Completely Seppo-brained. Being on the left doesn’t make you immune from the exceptionalism cool aid.
Russia can’t even fucking match Ukraine which is being drip-fed surplus. France alone could roll over Russia but they’d have a hard time keeping up with the Poles running on pure, distilled, wrath. The only reason they’re not in Moscow right now is because NATO is also a leash.
Hasn’t Russia been holding on to the claimed regions for almost an year now?
You mean hasn’t Russia slowly been attritioning itself in Bakhmut for no strategic gain whatsoever.
Not to mention that in the beginning Russia was claiming “Kyiv in three days”. It claimed Kherson. It claimed Kharkiv. Prigoshin wasn’t wrong when he called the whole thing a disaster in various colourful ways.
LMFAO
Yes. Did you need a primer?
No, but you obviously do.
You’re incorrect again! But at least you’re consistent.
😂