Above, a cover image of Liz Truss’s book.
The problem with writing prescriptions is that the patient’s aliment can change rendering the prescription ineffective.
In this case the patient is the one Liz writes about, “the West”.
I am going to refine the focus from “the West” down to Europe and further, the EU.
Donald Tusk put it succinctly the other day, when he described the EU’s predicament vis-à-vis the Ukraine war as 500 million Europeans relying on 300 million Americans to defend them against 140 million Russians…….
Very true!
Looked at from the viewpoint of Mr Trump’s MAGA base, we Europeans have been “freeloading”!
Now many Americans are famously ignorant about affairs and countries outside their borders. However, most Americans are aware of two things:
#1: That their “Tax Dollars” go to defend Europe.
#2: That we “Europeans” benefit from “socialized medicine” [deliberate US spelling].
To most Americans these two FACTS stick in their craw!
Understandably!
This is why the MAGA base are supportive of Mr Trump’s actions. That Mr Trump’s actions vis-à-vis the Ukraine war are likely to be disastrous to all of us – Americans included!
I would now like to deviate briefly to offer an open apology to Sir Keir Starmer: “Sending activists from one’s own political party to help a candidate in an ally’s election is generally a bad idea! However in this particular case (Trump v Harris) is was the correct thing to do! This because we are experiencing the consequences of the Trump win and a Harris win would would have been far, far preferable!
OK, Mrs Harris is extremely woke and a supporter of “Net Zero”. However, vis-à-vis the Ukraine war, she would more than likely have pursued the policy of her predecessor.
Sadly, tragically the Ukraine war had developed along the lines of the Great War. That the invader (the Germans) were checked at the Marne and the war developed into a war of attrition. That the armistice came about due not to a military defeat of Germany but Germany’s economic defeat – she was unable to prosecute the war as her economy had collapsed. Had Mrs Harris won and she had pursued the policy of her predecessor, the likelihood was that Putin’s Russia would have been unable to prosecute the war in about twelve month’s time. Ukraine would not have pushed the Russians out of Ukraine but the Russian economy would have collapsed and Russia would have been forced to sue for terms.
Mr Trump desires two things for himself:
To be given the Nobel Peace Prize (because President Obama received it) and to go down in history as a memorable president.
Well, he might achieve the former and he will most certainly achieve the latter – but not for the reason he hopes for! This because he and his sidekick Mr Vance will have been the authors of one of the greatest geo-political blunders since I don’t know when!
The issue is this: Mr Tusk’s quip is correct!
That it exists is one of the reasons why I have always been opposed to the whole idea of the European Union and why I supported Brexit!
You see, a functioning supra-national confederation requires the abilities of the members to unite. However they are most often divided. This because they are all very different nations with their own politics.
If as it would appear, Messrs. Trump & Vance are giving “notice to quit” NATO, then the European members of NATO have a very serious problem!
The problem for the European members of NATO is that the military capabilities of the USA could not be replaced easily or quickly – and that is not just an issue of cost. It is a matter of acquiring the capabilities and that takes time; time to manufacture the hardware and to recruit and train the personnel. Additionally, these are “top level” capabilities such as satellite C3I and strategic logistic support, capabilities possessed by the USA due to the size of the armed forces.
My proposal?
NB #1: Brexiteers should swallow a few blood pressure tablets before reading further!
NB #2: The UK is no longer in the EU and therefore would not be mandated to comply!
That upon the USA leaving NATO, it’s place should be taken up by the European Union. That members of the EU would be required to spend 5% of the GNI on defence of which 2.5% would be spent on their own armed forces and 2.5% on the EU’s!
This would give the newly created EU Commissioner for Defence the ability to acquire top level strategic capabilities such as the aforementioned along with a EU nuclear deterrent! It could of course form an EU Army, a EU Navy and an EU Air Force!
Since Messrs. Trump & Vance might give “notice to quit” the UNO then the USA’s permanent seat on the Security Council will likely be offered to India.
This raises the issue of where should the UNO be located?
Undoubtedly New York would be called into question!
Geneva is the most obvious location as many UNO organisations are based there and it was the location for the League of Nations.
My personal opinion?
Article 5 deterrence is based on TRUST. That trust has been lost. If Messrs. Trump & Vance start talking about the USA quitting NATO I suggest the other members suggest they do so.
This would seem crazy but it is not. A new security architecture along the lines I’ve suggested would have to be put in place at pace.
Although the UK is outside the EU and would not be required to participate, it should support it and spend the necessary 5% on defence. As should Norway.