Quotes
U.S. support will remain critical and a U.S. security guarantee is essential for a lasting peace, because only the U.S. can deter Putin from attacking again,
Starmer wrote in Monday's Daily Telegraph I do not say that lightly. I feel very deeply the responsibility that comes with potentially putting British servicemen and women in harm’s way,
This is not Europe that commands respect abroad. This is not the Europe that would be a serious partner to the North American ally,
A ‘bluff and pray’ approach that uses too few troops and is essentially based on the hope that Russia will not test it would be negligent and increases the likelihood of war in Europe.”
The most influential member of Nato seems to be Vladimir Putin right now,
Providing too few troops, or tripwire forces without reinforcements, would amount to a bluff that could invite Russia to test the waters. There would be little Nato could do about it”
Disagreements between the US and Europe have taken on a completely new quality,
he said in his weekly email to supporters Finding a European sui generis model is hard since what the Europeans can provide ad hoc would not offer credible protection,
Claudia Major, a German security expert, wrote in a working paper for SWP (German Institute for International and Security Affairs) in January A mission entirely without US support is inconceivable because of the mix of capabilities required for such an endeavour. US capabilities in the areas of air patrol, air and missile defence, and [command and control] in general, remain key capabilities and an indispensable prerequisite for the deployment of allied forces. While most, if not all, US operations could be conducted remotely without requiring a large US military footprint in Ukraine, a US military presence would significantly reinforce the deterrence message.”
Based on the strength of the Russian armed forces deployed in Ukraine (approximately 600,000-700,000), and taking into account the Ukrainian armed forces (more than 100 brigades), the ideal additional western contingent strength required would be around 150,000 soldiers. As these forces would be on permanent standby, there would be a need to rotate them. This would effectively triple the force requirement.”
One thing has to be made clear: this is not conservatism, or what conservatism used to mean. This is authoritarian-revolutionary.”
There is a lot of hot air and not much clarity about what the US is saying and what it is expecting. Let’s make sure we are not reacting to the wrong things,
We have moved from a world of rules and multilateral institutions to strongmen making deals over the heads of weaker, and smaller countries,
We need to take more responsibility, hike up defence spending and think how Europe can give value added to the US,
We try to reflect and look for the perfect solution. We are very process oriented, and not results oriented”.
One interpretation about what has happened in the last few days is that maybe this US administration does not quite like us very much, and maybe if we act by spending more on defence, and all the rest of it, we can somehow rekindle US interest and perhaps even US affection for Europe, including Ukraine. That is the best case scenario,
The question is: under what political and financial conditions would Paris and London be prepared to maintain or expand their own strategic capabilities for collective security?”
Europeans may simply not have the time for gradualism in security integration any more,
French leaders have three main worries,
an analysis published by the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) stated There is a wind of unity blowing over Europe, as we perhaps have not felt since the COVID period,
said Barrot, referring to the pandemic in 2020 when the 27 EU nations had to stand side by side to stave off a health catastrophe
