I have seen a number of US-based commentators rail against American involvement in many international events and wars, and to an extent they have a point. Not least, they’re right to ask hard questions about what America gets in return for all that apart from our love. Selling fancy military jets and tech is nice, but not much compensation, arguably, for much of the grief that comes with financing military efforts. So even if a different POTUS was office, we’d have reached this situation, if not quite the same way.
Remember that less than two months ago, the POTUS was a senile, crooked, and in my view deeply unpleasant old man who liked to shove America’s nose into UK domestic matters, such as Northern Ireland, to take just one example. So this is a bipartisan problem, not one specific to Trump and his circle.
In a way, Trump is doing Europe and certain other countries a favour, even if it does not come across that way. I expect S. Korea, Japan, even Taiwan, to spend even more on defence, such as anti-missile defence. Those nations must be deeply alarmed. I expect Israel to get involved in lending out its expertise to countries willing to work with Israel. (One side-effect of this period is that behind the scenes, military co-operation between Europe and Israel will increase. Let’s get IDF pilots of a certain age to train folk up. They’re the best in the world.)
Various thoughts this morning in London, as I get ready to fly on business to Zurich (the Swiss have some clever tech, by the way):
Net Zero is dead. Keir Starmer must in whatever way he can to sway his backbenchers and the chattering class, put NZ into the side of the road. That might mean sacking energy secretary Ed Milliband. Deindustrialisation must stop. Windmills, solar energy and happy thoughts cannot build a submarine, artillery shell factory or a bunch of anti-missile batteries. And screwing the British economy to make a tiny dent in C02 emissions so we feel all virtuous is a luxury belief. Luxuries are out.
Liz Kendall, the minister responsible for benefits in the UK, will have to squeeze benefits paid to millions of people who are currently allegedly too ill to work. We spend tens of billions on keeping working-age adults away from productive work. It’s unsustainabile, financially and morally. It also robs the UK of productive potential, and lets human capital disintegrate. If Starmer can blitz foreign aid, he can instruct his colleagues to do the same on welfare.
European nations will start to further restrict the ability of US-based companies, investors etc from buying controlling stakes in unlisted and listed European firms that produce tech and goods that have military uses, either explicitly, or potentially. Such firms will also be banned, or restricted, from listing on the New York Stock Exchange for the forseeable future.
Americans coming to Europe on various trips may notice that visa-free applications become more onerous. I don’t like it but I won’t be surprised if it happens, particularly if such a person has been to Russia in the past decade.
Intelligence sharing among the “Five Eyes” alliance that dates back to WW2 (the UK, US, Australia, New Zealand and Canada) will squeeze out the US to some extent, if not completely. Subtly, however, there will be more of a move towards countries we might have to trust a bit more. With Tulsi Gabbard as a intelligence-related US government member, some of the 5E countries will be nervous.
I want to stress that I don’t necessarily endorse all the actions that will be taken, or at least I don’t have time here to go into the finer details. Trump is going to be in office for four years and we don’t know what happens after the mid-terms. He’s also getting older and more volatile. At some point his acolytes will fall out (Musk, probably.) But whatever happens, Europe must rearm significantly, must increase focus on security and intelligence gathering capabilities, and prevent further US leverage over our resources where possible.
Starmer’s government is no more likely to end net zero that it is to end mass immigration. Commies never admit they are wrong, even when it is heads on spikes time. Their plans would have brought us to a socialist utopia if it wasn’t for the fascist reactionaries.
RDJ
“Fascist reactionaries “?
😵💫
Very good, Roué, you have mastered the dialectic.
“Why sometimes I’ve believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast”
Never underestimate TTK’s ability to channel his inner Red Queen. Net zero isn’t going away.
This post operates on the assumption that the hardcore Left really want to do good.
This is wrong, and much of their destructive ability derives from this undeserved generosity by the rest of us.
They want power. They see nothing but their own advancement. They are completely without conscience or principle.
Look at the back-biting within their claque, the tactical about-faces and situational ethics.
As well, many of them were drawn to the Left by inherent sadistic and vengeful tendencies – unchecked by education.
Fascist reactionaries – suffering from false consciousness.
This is a draft for a Bee article, isn’t it.
(Except the visa stuff, exactly the sort of petty nonsense to warm the lefty’s heart.)
All very good points. If we’re doing this in the USA, it really ought to be happening on your side, also. Problems and misunderstandings and offenses occur when countries have disparate expectations of each other. It should be right up front for all – we’re all retreating into our sides and borders.
I’m thinking y’all will be much happier if you needn’t deal with Trump.
@bobby b
I won’t be. I won’t agree with everything he does, but I think he will be very good for us.
“Fascist reactionaries”.
I have that T-shirt!
bobby,
For all of Trump’s flaws his most serious is he is capricious. I dunno if that is necessarily always a bad thing in itself but it makes him difficult to do deals with. Google “Nuclear Ghandi”
The notion that all the Western European alliances and political priorities all need re-aligning just because Trump has a second and final four year term is peak Trump Derangement Syndrome.
@NickM
For all of Trump’s flaws his most serious is he is capricious.
In this context I’d suggest that “capricious” is a pejorative for “nimble”. The idea that he is “difficult to do deals with” doesn’t hold water, unless by “difficult” you mean, “he is very good at getting the advantage”. I actually think he is a master class in deal making. To give an example: he promised to build the wall and that Mexico would pay for it. What happened to that? Well it is classic Trump. He did build the wall and Mexico is paying for it, the difference is that the wall is not built out of bricks or steel but out of the Mexican army.
Is that capricious? It seem to me better adjectives would be “nimble” and “innovative”.
And I think this is the same situation with regards to Ukraine. What do we want? We want the security of Ukraine. We can’t put the American military in there so put a civilian American component in there that demands American protection. Plus it generates money for both sides, and offers a significant deterrent to Putin. Add in some European troops… Is it perfect? No, because no deal ever is perfect, but it seems a good starting point for negotiation.
Of course if you think the only “deal” acceptable is “Russia humiliated, return to ante-bellum borders, and Putin’s festering corpse hanging from a lamp post in Red Square”, then it isn’t a deal you’d go for. But the simple fact is that there is absolutely no route to that result. Russia will, for example, defend Crimea as if it was St. Petersburg.
I’m not expert enough to judge Trump’s deal in whole. But it is the first innovative thought that has come along since this war started. And, looking at the evidence, it seems clear that Zelenskyy was manipulated by the Democrats shamelessly to gain some advantage. I have mixed feelings about the man, but I think he was royally screwed over in Washington, and not by Trump.
And all this European thing? It is window dressing. The Europeans could not organize a piss up in a brewery. I mean literally they could not. Can you imagine the French arguing with the Italians on the wine list, or the Germans demanding fair representation of their pilsner beers, and some tiny Greek dude jumping up and down yelling “what about Retsina and ouzo”. It would be a nightmare.
Johnathan, I have so much respect for you and your comments, but how can you possibly think this would lead to the end of Net Zero?
I’d agree, and also sort of disagree. Capriciousness seems to be a tool on his belt to be used when he sees fit, as do his more . . . remarkable . . . pronouncements. (Gulf of America?) Everything seems to be a part of setting the negotiation table and setting tones. I think he WANTS to be seen as unpredictable and somewhat of a loose cannon.
To me, that’s one way of using the power of being the USA to best advantage. If our prez is too nice and predictable, the possible power is lessened. (“Don’t worry, they’d never do THAT!”)
For decades, being powerful has meant that one must apologize more, and act weakly. We in the USA are in dire economic times, and dire world-stage times, and I welcome his new approach, mostly. We’re going to suffer through some econ reversals no matter what happens, but his approach might make them more bearable. For us.
But, yeah, he’s kind of scary at times.
(ETA: Timing. What Fraser Orr said.)