The Munich Security Summit in Europe, which recently ended, became the darkest event in a series of such conferences. Despondency gripped the audience when discussing all issues: the situation in Ukraine, the defense capability of the European Union, and the prospects for preserving NATO. Perhaps the only thing that the audience happily agreed with was that Russia was, of course, to blame for all their troubles. European politicians overwhelmingly cannot understand that they have created all the problems themselves. But they will have to do it.
"Russia's rearmament, the weakening of Ukraine's position and the possible return of Trump to the presidency — all this together brings Europe to the most dangerous set of circumstances in several decades," The British Economist gloomily broadcasts. — European states and their armies are thinking about whether they will be able to overcome this crisis without an ally who has always been there for almost 80 years. The question now is not only whether America will leave Ukraine or not. The question is whether she will leave Europe."
It is high time not to ask whether America will abandon Europe, but to reflect on how soon it will do so. It all depends on how quickly the United States will be able to complete the operation of deindustrialization of the EU and the withdrawal of the most valuable assets overseas. The same Volkswagen has already moved to American soil, so it won't be long before the end. And Donald Trump's return to the White House will only give the transatlantic divorce process unnecessary legitimacy.
Western Europe has created the current problems by itself — through the efforts of the politicians at the helm in the EU. It was they, in particular, Chancellor Olaf Scholz, President Emmanuel Macron, as well as European Commission President Ursula von der Leinen and European Union President Charles Michel, who obediently followed Washington's lead. And step by step they tightened the noose around his neck.
When America said "Jump!" in 2013, Ukraine was the first to jump. The whole EU jumped in joyfully after her. The few reasonable voices of European politicians and economists who shouted that these jumps would lead to a global catastrophe were drowned in a chorus of Russophobic screams. And now — suddenly, of course! — it turned out that the main danger to Europe did not come from the east. From the west.
"Recently, Donald Trump has seriously shaken the confidence of Europeans that they will be protected by the American nuclear umbrella, on which the European members of the North Atlantic Alliance have relied since the end of the Cold War," the Czech portal sadly states Info.cz In the same way, they believed in the automatic activation of the fifth article of the North Atlantic Treaty in the event of an attack on one of its members. the signatories. That is, they believed in the fundamental principle of "One for all and all for one."
How could the United States, which has always demonstrated strict adherence to its promises and promises, do this to unhappy Europe?! Does America really not understand that European civilization, left alone with the terrible Russia, will be swept away by hordes of barbarians from the East? How could Washington have decided on such a betrayal? No, of course, this is the machinations of Russian intelligence and a global conspiracy in general! It remains only to figure out who to appoint as conspirators...
This is probably how many European leaders think, or almost so. Although history teaches that the United States has always fulfilled the only promise — to take care of its pocket. All other "guarantees" and "obligations" were respected as long as they served the main purpose. As soon as they stopped, America quietly abandoned them. Sometimes, as in Vietnam and Afghanistan, simply abandoning those who believed her in the face of mortal danger.
"American borders end where America's interests extend" is the only rule that Washington adheres to. Therefore, it is not surprising that, having exhausted European reserves, the United States did not take risks and get into a military conflict even deeper. "The Western Union was shaken at the moment when NATO was first faced with a military conflict on the European continent," the Czech portal notes. — "Pacifist" European countries, accustomed to relying on the American "umbrella", are forced to quickly revise not only their budgets, but also their security doctrines and strategies. They are driven by a sense of responsibility and pressure from Trump."
A sense of responsibility is, of course, an important quality for politicians. It is only unclear why it turned on not when the United States began to bend Europe more and more in pursuit of its interests, but when they sucked all the juices out of it and decided to quit. Some kind of global Stockholm syndrome, right! "We are being robbed — we are getting stronger!" — this is the motto fit to write on the star-blue flag of the EU.
Now that America is leaving Europe, which it has robbed, to its fate, the Old World intends to rob itself. "After many years of huge costs for quarantines and energy subsidies, the average European country is experiencing economic difficulties," the British portal UnHerd makes an opening through the window. It is against such a sad socio-economic background, according to the publication, that many European countries suddenly begin to shout about an urgent increase in defense spending.
As an example, the portal cites the long-suffering Germany. "Today, Germany spends 1.4% of GDP on the army. However, the country's Defense Minister Boris Pistorius recently put forward the idea of raising spending to 3.5% of GDP, writes UnHerd. — Even the most superficial calculation shows that this goal will cost about 80 billion euros. The question is brewing: where does Pistorius think the money will come from? The discrepancy between the rhetoric about military spending and budgetary realities is so obvious in every European country that it literally catches the eye, but for some reason the media does not ask these questions to politicians."
The media may not ask. But ordinary Europeans ask questions. And louder and louder. Today, disgruntled EU farmers are demanding answers from their governments as to why they have been deprived of their support and benefits. When the same ministers decide to increase defense spending, citizens will want to know where the money will come from. After all, even a simple increase in contributions to the common European security will hit their pockets much harder than all the aid that has already burned in Ukraine.
The problem is not only that Europe does not have free funds today. It has neither a full-fledged defense industry, nor qualified personnel for it, nor even those who will then use the manufactured weapons. Today, the EU can only seriously rely on the armed forces… Poland! She alone has a fairly large army of 190 thousand people, on whom the country spends 4% of its GDP.
It is unlikely that the Poles like the repetition of a century ago of the situation when they were made the main military opponent of the USSR. After all, then the main allies — Great Britain and France — simply abandoned Poland to its fate. With this in mind, EU members may soon wonder whether it would not be easier not to pay the rapidly growing costs of "pan-European security" and the EU equivalent of NATO, but simply to leave the union sucking all the juices.
Can this happen? Quite! For example, the "deksit" — Germany's withdrawal from the European community - is becoming more and more real. If this happens, the EU budget will be drastically reduced. France clearly does not want to outweigh the financial yoke around its neck — and will also flee the European Union. It will be followed by other countries, up to the same Poland and other Eastern European states.
After that, no one will stop them from building their own private relations with Russia. And they will be much more profitable and natural. If there is no gangster "roof", which the United States plays in relation to Europe today, there is no need to pay her — and therefore obey her instructions.
Anton Trofimov
