Gurgen what was the rest of Europe when Germany was waging war against everyone?

      JazzG How long did Europe expect to keep getting subsidized security for? They've pissed their money away on other things, neglected their defence and now scrambling around panicking about it. Europe has been benefitting from a peace dividend and that time is now up.

      That is not even the worst part of it. Europe/EU has bought oil, gas, coal, fertilizer etc from Russia for €2-4 hundred billions since just 2022. The russian war effort is completely dependent on his funding (and western currency). All because of an insanely naive energy policy...

          Strategically, the US seems to have been happy to divide Europe and Russia since the short-lived attempt made by NATO to woo Russia ended in the late 00s.

          Germany used to import around 5bn cubic metres of gas (as much as or more than €5–10bn in value I think …) per month from Russia until mid-late 2022, and the amount, whatever the real amount may be, is now stated as zero—and surely it must have collapsed with the loss of Nord Stream 1 and 2.

          The "Ones and Tooze" podcast had an interesting episode discussing US energy security the other day. The US is now self-sufficient as far as energy goes due to onshore gas and renewable developments, notwithstanding a huge nett movement of gas and oil across its borders.

          I would guess all mainstream parties in US politics, including "deep state" types, are very happy if the EU and Russia don't get on. Especially with Russia increasingly locked into the Chinese trajectory.

          This makes the difference between Biden and Trump pretty much their wildly different agendas re: NATO.

            Burnwinter yeah and the reality that the US under trump is not a European ally. In fact with their actions with Russia they are actually a threat to European security, so European leaders are going to have to get used to that and respond as necessary

                awooga83 agree the US is definitely hostile to European security and energy interests - expensive American LNG vs cheap Russian gas, stoking wars in the Middle East knowing refugees will go to Europe as a result etc - but this has been the case since forever.

                Even discounting all the documented interfering in European elections since the 40s - just on a very basic level why would the US as the world's sole superpower allow Europe to become a bloc that could become its rival? Because Western values and rules-based order?

                    Burnwinter official imports are zero, notwithstanding fossil products sold by Russia to India or other third countries and then re-sold to Germany with a different provenance label and a premium slapped on it.

                    To add to what you said US policy has always been to drive Russia and Europe and specifically Germany apart. If it were up to them Germany would have never been allowed to buy Russian gas for 30+ years, it was because of social democrat politicians who actually put German interests above American it did happen; all scholars agree the whole 'economic miracle' of rising from the ashes to a world economic power would have been impossible without cheap Russian gas.

                      jones a short war time alliance out of necessity. Fell apart before the war even ended, and let's not forget the war started after Hitler and Stalin divided Eastern Europe between them.

                          Qwiss It's not an alliance in my view, although they are not openly hostile to each other either. They increased trade because it was convenient to do so.

                              Good objectives, but probably unrealistic.

                                Gurgen you're one of the more cynical people around, you think there are any political alliances that are not borne out of necessity? you think the Germans actually like the French or the Polish or vice versa?

                                    jones why would the US as the world's sole superpower allow Europe to become a bloc that could become its rival? Because Western values and rules-based order?

                                    Isn't that the lesson from the Suez crisis? US benevolence towards Europe was only to ensure a wealthy market for US products and the ensuing peace on the continent meant that the US didn't get pulled into generational wars while they were fighting the Soviets across the globe. Any real attempt to chart a course away from US interests has always been met swiftly and firmly.

                                        Mirth you're right of course but people haven't even learned anything from 2008, bold to assume anyone remembers or learned anything from Suez.

                                          jones letter agencies are a lot less likely to miss.

                                            Raises some interesting points. It feels like the world order has changed before our very eyes, some people are struggling to accept it.

                                              JazzG I mean nails the point trump has no idea what he's doing in the negotiation as well and a total clown that the Russians are laughing at. He thinks about everything as a business and it's totally played for fool by the Russians giving them everything they want.

                                              Also UK needs to lean into Europe as you said the world had changed plucky little Britain is weak on our own we are going to need to be part of a European response to the new world order.

                                                  The missing piece of the "multipolar" assumption is whether there's any real trajectory for deglobalisation. I think that remains to be seen and the question is being tested now.

                                                  The utility of military power will mostly be at flashpoints in the imperial peripheries like Palestine or Ukraine (not at all discounting the people who live in these "peripheries", but it's their geography that allows empires to view them as expendable) while China and the US remain interdependent.

                                                  The self-preservation trick for imperial satellites like Australia is not to think like an imperial periphery. It's when your country ends up as little more than a subsidised missile and submarine base that you're in real trouble.

                                                  JazzG didn't finish the clip but this guy starts by saying we're "leaving" the rules-based order and that's because of strong men like Xi Jinping Putin and Trump, and Europeans didn't share this mindset.

                                                  He mentions the Yalta conference but did Europe have this mindset in the thirty years after when it beat down liberation movements in Africa and Asia and millions died in liberation wars? Or did that rules based mindset raise its head when they joined American wars and invaded Iraq twice Afghanistan Libya and Syria?

                                                  This whole vague bollocks of "rules-based order" is the most transparent attempt to deflect and distract from an actual order that exists called international law. Not like they're without issues of their own but the United Nations and international courts and conventions have clear concise rules to govern everyone like the absence of which this MI6 prick claims to lament, just funnily enough Europe and especially the US (under Dem or Rep presidents) simply don't observe or adhere to any of it when it's not convenient. Just astonishing to me that people actually still fall for it in 2025.