The pessimism reflects concern that Russia may be winning a so-called hybrid war with Europe, weakening the options available to Nato war planners in the event of military conflict.
The surge in support for the populist forces in Europe’s main military states is also endangering proposals for a group of five European countries, including the UK, to take on a new coordination role as the US prepares to reduce its commitments to the conventional defence of Europe.
Defence officials, speaking at a forum convened by the Munich Security Conference (MSC), the leading security foundation, said the European public may not have the appetite for a prolonged war, requiring Nato to focus its plans on a relatively quick conflict.
One recent British cabinet member admitted the west had been “crap” at educating its public about the scale of the hybrid conflict with Russia. Another UK diplomat claimed successive British prime ministers had done nothing to explain the scale of the threat.
They said this had left ministers locked in an unenviable task of persuading unprepared voters to cut welfare spending to fund defence. “The level of the debate has been at that of a kindergarten,” the UK diplomat admitted.
or don’t cut welfare spending and raise taxes on corps and the wealthiest.
What are you? Some kind of Communist?
So it’s not that Europe can’t, they’re worried about the population not wanting to. Because the economy of Russia is laughable compared to Europe.
Russia can barely afford to sustain its war of aggression against Ukraine. If EU countries are not subverted from within by pro-Russian Quislings, Russia won’t stand a chance against Europe. That’s why there’s been a long-term campaign to undermine European solidarity and to install stooges such as Orban. They are already at war with us. It just hasn’t gotten to the shooting part yet.
“The level of the debate has been at that of a kindergarten,” the UK diplomat admitted.
That just shows that you know your audience.
That quote strikes me as suspect, since the UK doesn’t have “kindergarten”. It’s like hearing an “anonymous UK diplomat” quoted as referring to rubbish as “garbage”.
DYK kindergarten is linguisticailly german meaning children-garden.
They want to cut welfare by any means, because then they can lower the taxes on the rich and powerful. Starting a war is a fantastic source of both fear for the populace (making them more willing to treat permanent loss of quality of life as a merely temporary set back) and contracts with which to funnel money to the already rich and powerful.
Don’t be fooled. Russia is a threat to the sovereignty of Ukraine and other nearby countries and we should absolutely help them defend themselves (and even push the offensive if it means ending the war). But we should absolutely not funnel money into a war machine designed only to ratchet funding further up and eventually demand a foe we can use our weapons on.
We should not start a war because we refuse to tax the rich. This journalist and this outlet should be publicly ridiculed for their pro-warfare, anti-welfare stance. Society should be about progress and strong financial security for every person is a meaningful metric of said progress.
This shows the importance of helping Ukraine win. As long as Russia is fighting in Ukraine, it is difficult for it to turn its attention elsewhere. If Ukraine wins, Europe will have Ukraine on its side.
As long as Russia is fighting in Ukraine, it is difficult for it to turn its attention elsewhere.
That was the Flypaper Strategy pitched by GWB back during the Iraq War.
The Battle of Dien Bien Phu is a better example of the Flypaper Strategy. In the case of Ukraine, Europe is not trying to draw Russia to attack Ukraine but it’s Putin making that choice. Actually, it would be better to attract Russia to attack Europe where it could be destroyed by the combined European armies and perhaps the US but don’t count on Trump. In the present situation, Europe could help Ukraine more. France could supply its Rafale fighter and Germany its Taurus missile.
The Battle of Dien Bien Phu is a better example of the Flypaper Strategy
I don’t think that works, as the “Flypaper” in this analogy would be better defined as the WW1 Central Powers.
Ukraine/Russia has much more in common with the European theaters of the World Wars (or the Napoleonic Wars) than the anti-colonial rebellions in their aftermath.
Actually, it would be better to attract Russia to attack Europe where it could be destroyed by the combined European armies
People keep floating this conflict as A) inevitable and B) decisively favoring Europe. But I cannot imagine a world in which any of the central European countries emerge from the conflict without suffering enormously.
Nobody actually wins in this kind of exchange.
The Battle of Dien Bien Phu used the flypaper theory in that the French attempted to draw the Viet Minh into attacking Dien Bien Phu where the French thought they could destroy them.
War between Europe and Russia would be destructive but Europe has to decide a solution to Russia’s hybrid war against it.
The Battle of Dien Bien Phu used the flypaper theory in that the French attempted to draw the Viet Minh into attacking Dien Bien Phu where the French thought they could destroy them.
But they failed. And their defeat was so horrifying for the French public that the government lost its civilian support and was forced to withdraw from Indochina as a result.
If Ukraine is Europe’s Dien Bien Phu, that doesn’t look good for the Europeans.
War between Europe and Russia would be destructive but Europe has to decide a solution to Russia’s hybrid war against it.
I have no idea how Russia and the rest of Europe can reconcile after the last decade of relational decay. But I have to assume there’s some path back to peace that doesn’t run through a Ukraine-style missile exchange that stretches all the way to the Atlantic. There’s no world in which Moscow trading ballistics with Berlin, Paris, and London ends better for humanity than one without it.
The flypaper theory is correct but in the Battle of Dien Bien Phu, the French underestimated the Viet Minh. Specifically, the French didn’t believe the Viet Minh would be able to haul artillery up the surrounding mountains.
What I said was that Europe would prefer that Russia attack it rather than Ukraine. Then the combined forces of Europe would be able to defeat Russia. War might be inevitable if Russia continues to attack Ukraine and provoke Europe with hybrid war. The UK and France gave Hitler the Sudetenland hoping that this would appease him and avoid war but it didn’t.
What I said was that Europe would prefer that Russia attack it rather than Ukraine.
That’s an insane thing to say, both on it’s face and based on the last four years of Europeans very strategically avoiding direct confrontation with Russia.
Then the combined forces of Europe would be able to defeat Russia.
Napoleon on line 1. Hitler on line 2. They are both eager to discuss what you have in mind.
The UK and France gave Hitler the Sudetenland
It wasn’t theirs to give. The Sudetenland is in Czechoslovakia, a country that didn’t even exist until 1918. It was full of Austro-Hungarians who were some of the first foreigners to explicitly align with Nazi Germany.
The UK and France weren’t in a position to stop him, any more than they were in a position to stop the proto-fascist war hero Gabriele Annunzio and a rogue force of Italian mutineers from seizing the Adriatic port city of Fiume in 1919.
Might as well claim Obama gave Putin Crimea. Or that Bush gave him South Ossetia and Abkhazia.
The Donbus had similar problems. It was populated by a large number of Russian nationals who were getting propaganda pumped into their brains from across the border. That was kicking off domestic insurgency, which Ukrainian nationalists were eager to squash.
Europeans had neither skin in the game nor influence in the region. All they were willing to do is send mercenaries and cheap military equipment over the border. And we know how that worked out.
Nobody wanted an all out war with Russia.
Totally unrelated but another post on here is of a news article that uses precisely the same thumbnail as this one to describe how Ukraine is considering taxing porn to fund defense.
Modern journalism is just sixty part-time reporters standing around a photocopier.
