Hard to believe the EU was so foolish as to waste precious time—years—while Ukraine gave them cover. And they had to know how Trump was likely to act if re-elected. Putin said what he intended to do. No one should have doubted him.
Yes. what they did will most likely get lost in the news cycle. But it was an excellent move. They doubled Ukraine aid and now Poland is saying they will invest in Ukraine. Sweden made sure that there is no stall in the aid flow at an extremely critical moment. Brilliant decision to announce it in the middle of all this.
I think once the EU has their experts examine the current state of Russia and its death throes, they will see Ukraine’s victory is possible. While China will continue to be a powerful presence in the world, it will be vital for the western world develop a plan to stay unified and remove the continued threat of Russia.
Ukraine, I'm sure, has noticed the pattern in American support. When the public appearance of support is necessary, it is apparent. When a critical mission needs particular support (like Ukraine's early counteroffensive) suddenly StarLink can't be used near "territorial" Russia. Now, with Article 4, the U.S. is waffling on the drone incursion - "Oh, it might have been a mistake..." Europe must understand by now that they can't rely on the U.S. even for a fig leaf of protection. It's not in the President's personal self-interest. He won't lower the price of oil below $60/bbl because that's what it costs the U.S. to produce new oil. He won't cut off U.S. imports from Russia because he wants the metals. (We're down to less than $2 billion, but every dollar helps.) He won't help because he can't out-bully Poutine, and he can't use possible aid to Ukraine to extort concessions from Europe.
France and the UK need to simply provide SCALP systems to Ukraine and start up production in earnest. Germany needs to provide Taurus and step up production. They cannot allow Russia to saturate the airspace on a nightly basis with drones and missiles. BTW, you think Putin would not go for power interconnections between Ukraine and the rest of Europe? He will. And that is a direct attack on NATO that would invoke Article 5. Those interconnectors are a lifeline to the Ukrainian power system and provide power when generating stations in Ukraine are attacked. Start now to avoid the inevitable later.
"If they can't step up when Putin attacks Poland—a NATO member—what's the point of any promises at all?"
The whole "security guarantees" discussion has always been about postponing political and economic pain. A viable, or even slightly credible, peace requires Putin being put in a losing position. This requires action now. Instead of taking costly action it is so much easier to promise action (if needed) in a few years.
And Sweden stepped up too?
Hard to believe the EU was so foolish as to waste precious time—years—while Ukraine gave them cover. And they had to know how Trump was likely to act if re-elected. Putin said what he intended to do. No one should have doubted him.
Thank you for the excellent update.
Yes. what they did will most likely get lost in the news cycle. But it was an excellent move. They doubled Ukraine aid and now Poland is saying they will invest in Ukraine. Sweden made sure that there is no stall in the aid flow at an extremely critical moment. Brilliant decision to announce it in the middle of all this.
I think once the EU has their experts examine the current state of Russia and its death throes, they will see Ukraine’s victory is possible. While China will continue to be a powerful presence in the world, it will be vital for the western world develop a plan to stay unified and remove the continued threat of Russia.
Europe actually needs security guarantees from Ukraine.
OTAN/ NATO - there remains no credible doubt that Ukraine should be welcomed.
It's us that needs to step up.
Russia is not Putin;
and vice versa. Elba is too good for him; perhaps there's a temporary spot above the Arctic Circle, north of Kamchatka; Donald could be his decorator.
Ukraine, I'm sure, has noticed the pattern in American support. When the public appearance of support is necessary, it is apparent. When a critical mission needs particular support (like Ukraine's early counteroffensive) suddenly StarLink can't be used near "territorial" Russia. Now, with Article 4, the U.S. is waffling on the drone incursion - "Oh, it might have been a mistake..." Europe must understand by now that they can't rely on the U.S. even for a fig leaf of protection. It's not in the President's personal self-interest. He won't lower the price of oil below $60/bbl because that's what it costs the U.S. to produce new oil. He won't cut off U.S. imports from Russia because he wants the metals. (We're down to less than $2 billion, but every dollar helps.) He won't help because he can't out-bully Poutine, and he can't use possible aid to Ukraine to extort concessions from Europe.
France and the UK need to simply provide SCALP systems to Ukraine and start up production in earnest. Germany needs to provide Taurus and step up production. They cannot allow Russia to saturate the airspace on a nightly basis with drones and missiles. BTW, you think Putin would not go for power interconnections between Ukraine and the rest of Europe? He will. And that is a direct attack on NATO that would invoke Article 5. Those interconnectors are a lifeline to the Ukrainian power system and provide power when generating stations in Ukraine are attacked. Start now to avoid the inevitable later.
"If they can't step up when Putin attacks Poland—a NATO member—what's the point of any promises at all?"
The whole "security guarantees" discussion has always been about postponing political and economic pain. A viable, or even slightly credible, peace requires Putin being put in a losing position. This requires action now. Instead of taking costly action it is so much easier to promise action (if needed) in a few years.