The proto-imperial European Union apparatchiki care about nothing more than ridding themselves of that troublesome prefix.
Von der Leyen proclaimed that the EU had already matured into a fully-fledged geopolitical union through its support for Ukraine and its stance toward an increasingly assertive China. In a run-up to the December 2023 EU-China Summit, the Balticconnector incident tested Brussels’ commitment to hold Beijing accountable for challenging European security. The incident lent credence to the argument that Beijing was not merely leaning on Moscow’s side but also providing direct economic and technical support to the Russian war effort. The EU’s response was nowhere to be seen, neglecting to support Estonia or Finland and leaving them to deal with Beijing alone. This development raises serious questions about the EU’s geopolitical outreach at the start of 2024.Let's even set aside the absurd notion that Von de Leyen is up to making the EU a robust military power. The basic problem is that EU has no particular interest in supporting Estonia and Finland for the purpose of actually helping Estonia and Finland. They'll oppose Russia--or reach out to it--to gain the authority to have a relationship with Russia.
The EU wants power--the "strategic autonomy" it drones on about so often--to defeat the only foreign enemy it truly fears--the United States--which stands in the way of their imperial desires:
[Reduced American military presence in Europe and Euro pressure to replace NATO with the EU are] allowing Europeans to revert to their pre-World War II nature of being a mix of autocracy, monarchy, and democracy. I had to be reminded by this author that our long period of influence in Europe during the Cold War had a role in making Europe truly democratic:
It is easy to forget--and this was a useful reminder to me--that Europe with its autocracies and monarchies was not fully part of a free West (although obviously part of the Western tradition) until we rebuilt Western Europe in that template after World War II. And NATO expansion after defeating the Soviet Union was more explicit in demanding democracy and rule of law for new members.
The little people of the small member states are just today's tiny pieces on the board easier to push around. Don't buy their kinder and gentler empire image.
And please, stop talking about Europe when you mean the European Union. That sleight of hand is deliberate to ease you through that no-man's land between friendly, safe geographic Europe where you vacationed to tooth-and-claw political Europe under the firm control of Brussels and its legions of bureaucrats smothering geographic Europe in the red tape of 10,000 cheese regulations:
The Soviet Union relied on lots of tanks and secret police to keep their restive imperial provinces in line. And in the end it was not enough.
Who knew that 10,000 cheese regulations would have been more effective in tying the imperial provinces to the motherland?
All the talk in that initial article about what "Europe"--that is, the EU--is failing to do in its own neighborhood lets you just ease past the question of whether the EU should have that power rather than NATO with American leadership.
The EU should not have that power. Unless freedom and liberty are unwanted in a geographic Europe pining for political Europe:
The Euro elites wrongly claim that the European Union itself has given Europe its long peace since World War II. They despise NATO and America so much that they actually believe their own BS.
The sad fact is that without America, the USSR would have conquered Western Europe.
And without America's continued influence Europe will revert to its norm of autocracies and intra-European violence.
The EU may change focus, but the ultimate goal remains constant.
The EU is determined “to forge its own identity in the military realm distinct from NATO, which it sees as US-dominated,” said David Des Roches, associate professor at the Near East South Asia Center for Security Studies. “They have set up parallel operations to NATO operations going back years. In this instance, they also do not want to be seen as part of a US operation, which they fear will have an offensive component.”
US officials have stressed that Prosperity Guardian is a “defensive coalition” and is separate from the offensive American and British military strikes on Houthi targets in Yemen, but it appears some European capitals see value in daylight between the two missions anyway.
Why? Seriously?
And the EU knows that its more passive mission will rely on the offensive component that America is--so far half-heartedly--leading.
UPDATE: Huh:
U.S. military officials are working with the European Union to review an incident in which German frigate Hessen fired twice at an MQ-9 drone earlier this week during a multinational naval protection mission in the Red Sea.
My initial thought is that the EU despises America. So maybe we should take a close look at the EU rules of engagement.
But upon sober protection, this is probably just an issue of the Germans being out of practice. Let's hope that when this is over the EU-sent Germans do more damage to the Houthi than to us.
Kidding aside, it sounds like it was our fault.
NOTE: The image was made from DALL-E. And yeah, the random nonsensical text put in the image was too good not to incorporate.
NOTE: TDR Winter War of 2022 coverage continues here.
