this post was submitted on 27 Feb 2025
42 points (92.0% liked)

Europe

6541 readers
682 users here now

News and information from Europe 🇪🇺

(Current banner: La Mancha, Spain. Feel free to post submissions for banner images.)

Rules (2024-08-30)

  1. This is an English-language community. Comments should be in English. Posts can link to non-English news sources when providing a full-text translation in the post description. Automated translations are fine, as long as they don't overly distort the content.
  2. No links to misinformation or commercial advertising. When you post outdated/historic articles, add the year of publication to the post title. Infographics must include a source and a year of creation; if possible, also provide a link to the source.
  3. Be kind to each other, and argue in good faith. Don't post direct insults nor disrespectful and condescending comments. Don't troll nor incite hatred. Don't look for novel argumentation strategies at Wikipedia's List of fallacies.
  4. No bigotry, sexism, racism, antisemitism, islamophobia, dehumanization of minorities, or glorification of National Socialism. We follow German law; don't question the statehood of Israel.
  5. Be the signal, not the noise: Strive to post insightful comments. Add "/s" when you're being sarcastic (and don't use it to break rule no. 3).
  6. If you link to paywalled information, please provide also a link to a freely available archived version. Alternatively, try to find a different source.
  7. Light-hearted content, memes, and posts about your European everyday belong in [email protected]. (They're cool, you should subscribe there too!)
  8. Don't evade bans. If we notice ban evasion, that will result in a permanent ban for all the accounts we can associate with you.
  9. No posts linking to speculative reporting about ongoing events with unclear backgrounds. Please wait at least 12 hours. (E.g., do not post breathless reporting on an ongoing terror attack.)
  10. Always provide context with posts: Don't post uncontextualized images or videos, and don't start discussions without giving some context first.

(This list may get expanded as necessary.)

Posts that link to the following sources will be removed

Unless they're the only sources, please also avoid The Sun, Daily Mail, any "thinktank" type organization, and non-Lemmy social media. Don't link to Twitter directly, instead use xcancel.com. For Reddit, use old:reddit:com

(Lists may get expanded as necessary.)

Ban lengths, etc.

We will use some leeway to decide whether to remove a comment.

If need be, there are also bans: 3 days for lighter offenses, 7 or 14 days for bigger offenses, and permanent bans for people who don't show any willingness to participate productively. If we think the ban reason is obvious, we may not specifically write to you.

If you want to protest a removal or ban, feel free to write privately to the primary mod account @[email protected]

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

In truth, it could take a decade before Europe is able to defend itself without America’s help. To understand Europe’s challenge, start with the debate over Ukraine. European countries are currently discussing the prospect of a military deployment in Ukraine to enforce any future peace deal. The talks, which are being led by France and Britain, envisage sending a relatively modest force, of perhaps low tens of thousands of troops. They would not be deployed in the east at the front line, but to Ukrainian cities, ports, nuclear power plants and other critical national infrastructure, according to a Western official.

Any such deployment would, however, expose three serious weaknesses. One is that it would stretch European forces thin. There are approximately 230 Russian and Ukrainian brigades in Ukraine, though most are understrength. Many European countries would struggle to produce one combat-capable brigade each. Second, it would open up serious gaps in Europe’s own defences. A British deployment to Ukraine, for instance, would probably swallow up units currently earmarked as high-readiness and reserve forces for nato, leaving holes in the alliance’s war plans. Above all, the Europeans acknowledge that any deployment would need significant American support not only in the form of specific “enablers”, such as intelligence and air-defence assets, but also the promise of back-up should Russia attack.

Mirror: https://archive.is/tyyvg

all 23 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 9 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Europe has gotten complacent in thinking the US would always be their ally. They need to strengthen their military NOW instead of relying on the US as it's clear their connections can change on a whim.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

As I see it EU has about three years before agent Krasnov starts his invasion. He needs this war to extend term limits and keep his power. Watch how over the next few years he dismantles our allied relationships and places the blame on the US old allies while removing anyone in the US that dares go against him installing yesmen in their place.

Putin is too weak to go against the EU alone. China is a wildcard. My guess is that russia, US, North Korea and China will form a new axis of evil within four years.

I hope I'm wrong and there is still so much that can happen in a few years. But If I was the EU I'd be getting ready.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

China fully aligning with Russia is a stretch. That would be an incredibly fragile alliance.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago

They don't need a full alignment.

Russia is weakening the USA and its relationship to its allies, weakening resistance to a possible Chinese invasion of Taiwan and its claims to the South China Sea.

The only issues they may come to clash with is Central Asia, but China seems ok with letting Russia have geopolitical control as long as China has economic access to these countries.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago

Complacency is basically the whole vibe of everyone in the West and their top local quintile. I miss the old days when powerful dudes were supposed to know history.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 4 months ago

He's working with donkeys because he's out of vehicles to carry supplies to the front line. I think they can take him.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 months ago

I really wish someone would kill Putin, Trump would no longer have marching orders, Ukraine would be left alone, and we'd all have fewer trolls in comment sections.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 4 months ago

The Economist is always a piece too easily discarded.

It's delusional to think Russia would have any chance. They failed to beat Ukraine before it received any military aid. A single nation. What makes anyone seriously think Russia could take on an entire military alliance?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I am not a military expert, so that's certainly a reason why I can't follow everything in this article. The Bruegel analysis the Economist mentions, however, says:

From a macroeconomic perspective, the numbers are small enough for Europe to replace the US fully. Since February 2022, US military support to Ukraine has amounted to €64 billion, while Europe, including the United Kingdom, sent €62 billion. In 2024, US military support amounted to €20 billion out of a total of €42 billion. To replace the US, the EU would thus have to spend only another 0.12 percent of its GDP – a feasible amount [...]

A significantly more challenging scenario for Europe would be an unlikely peace deal accepted by Ukraine. In such a scenario, Russia is likely to continue its military build-up, creating a formidable military challenge to all of the EU in a very short period, given current Russian production. The EU and allies including the UK and Norway would need to accelerate their military build-ups immediately and massively [...]

It also says:

A Russian attack on a European Union country is thus conceivable. Assessments by NATO, Germany, Poland, Denmark and the Baltic states put Russia as ready to attack within three to ten years 4 . It could be sooner [...]

Europe’s first priority is to continue supporting Ukraine – Ukraine’s experienced military is currently the most effective deterrent against a Russian attack on the EU. If Ukraine decides that a US-Russian deal to end the war is unacceptable – because Putin’s peace guarantees are not credible, for example – Europe is capable of providing additional weapons to Ukraine to ensure its fighting capacities remain as they are currently. Ukraine and the EU rely on some critical US strategic enablers, including intelligence and satellite communications. These are difficult to replace in the short term but there are substitutes if necessary [...]

Rapidly generating such increases [in military equipment and production] requires an extraordinary effort, though experience [in Eruope] shows market economies can do it [...]

Bruegel says -unsurprisingly- that Europe must significantly increase its defense spending, and also makes suggestions how this could be done best (amongst others, by replacing the US military-industrial base). Overall it provides a different picture than the Economist imho.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

The report also just stops very short of saying the quiet part out loud: the strategy so far has been to use Ukraine as a sacrificial pawn to bog down Russia. This cynical strategy worked so far, but there are signs that the Ukrainians don't want to take part in this any longer, and this is what has all the military analysts running around like headless chicken right now. Trump is basically just accelerating the inevitable.

What lessons we can take from that and what the best new strategy will be is disputed right now.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago

The problem is going to be deciding what the peace looks like.

Russia is asking for more land than it controls and doesn't provide security guarantees to Ukraine, opening Ukraine up to a possible third invasion in the near future.

Ukraine seems open to accepting its current losses, but likely needs security guarantee by some entity powerful enough to deter a third invasion. You also have NATO/EU nations being unwilling to withdraw troops from nations bordering Russia because this is the second time Russia has invaded a neighboring country in 11 years and these nations aren't belligerents yet.