Saturday, October 02, 2021


"Structural Cracks in Atlantic Alliance" (Ritter).  Sets out the dynamics quite well.  If the French submarine debacle has convinced the Europeans that the Americans aren't reliable allies - and what other conclusion could anyone draw? -  they could leave NATO and set up their own army, but at an enormous cost in wealth (the Europeans largely ride on American coattails and the American ability to fund ridiculous levels of militarism by running the printing presses of the reserve currency).  The alternative, then, is to simply make peace with Russia, and call the whole Cold War off.

It is striking that NATO is there to protect against some imaginary military attack from Russia, while the Europeans have simultaneously put their entire energy security into Russian hands.  Merely by shutting off the taps, Russia could put Europe into as bad, or worse, a situation than if it started a war against Europe.  Of course, the massive amount of money involved in selling energy to Europe is a guarantee that Russia would never do such a thing.  Why is NATO, or a replacement European army, even in the discussion?  Once you have decided to economically link to Europe, the military options become absurd.  The Americans pushed so hard against Nord Stream for this very reason, as Nord Stream reveals the stupidity of both NATO and any expensive replacement for it.  The only reason this isn't obvious is that the bribed and blackmailed Euro-trash politicians have personal reasons to preserve the immensely stupid status quo.

blog comments powered by Disqus