My regular update on global conflict and confrontation. This week: Trump's push for peace while conceding many of Putin's demands, transformation of Europe's security, and the war in Ukraine.
Drone wars: It is perhaps noteworthy that in the past week or three reported Russian artillery losses have gone, up to my eye markedly. In addition, it seems to me that I am seeing more Ukraine reports than in times past of small tactical advances. A 'peace' negotiation with neither Europe not Ukraine present is unlikely to have much effect. As always, the more professional eye of the substack owner herehere likely has a much better perspective.
A pretty good reason to abide by such a deal will be if Trump makes any U.S. assistance conditional upon it. Which is pretty much what Trump has threatened.
Whether Europe can (or will be willing to) replace lost U.S. assistance is questionable. Whether Ukraine survives even with Western assistance at the same level is also questionable.
You yourself quoted Zelensky saying that Ukraine would likely not survive without U.S. assistance.
This is an ugly picture indeed, unjust as hell, but it's the reality of where we are right now.
The events of last week have thoroughly confused me. I thought I have some vague idea of the plan from US side, but I was definitely wrong - unless there’s layers upon layers of subterfuge, which now I doubt.
I would like to believe that Europe as a whole can step up, but I doubt it, today. Maybe in 2-3 years.
And regarding Taiwan, I read quite a few comments saying it’s all smoke and mirrors, but I tend to agree with your assessment that this is rehearsal, not just exercise.
We’ll see what the future holds, but it does look grim.
Well, I can’t argue with your analysis of the Trump administration’s latest comments re developments and commitments in Europe. Whilst none of it should have been unexpected, the incoherent statements from Hegseth, Vance & Trump should give no one any illusions as to where the US sees its future. Remember it was Trumps negotiations (in his first term) with the Taliban that led to the eventual withdrawal of NATO troops from Afghanistan. The Afghan government was left out of these negotiations - sound familiar?
Hegseth & Vance may have done Europe a favour - if they can act in a concerted manner.
The EU as a whole, is more than strong enough to take on Russia, even to the extent of being a fighting force in Ukraine and not just a peace keeping force i.e. a European Army. The EU does not really need America if it puts its mind to it, but the US may find that it needs the EU, at least to buy weapons and gas.
Trumps musings on the issues surrounding Ukraine and Europe will give them no comfort and no walk back from Trump or his minions should be entertained, is Europe up to the challenge?
How does this affect us here in Australia? Do we forsake our links with US? Is it time for Australia to form stronger links with Japan, New Zealand, South Korea and the Philippines along the lines of NATO or the European equivalent. Can we develop our own independent defence industry? Do we really need to spend $370 billion for 8 submarines which may or may not be ready by 2050’s? What if China invades Taiwan in 2028?
Can we trust the US ever again? This current administration of Trump’s is just a cohort of yes men (with Tulsi Gabbard now to added to the mix) with maligned intent. Look what happened to Putin when he surrounded himself with yes men.
"'They (Ukraine) may make a deal, they may not make a deal. They may be Russian someday, or they may not be Russian someday.'
"Really? Ukraine made it very clear in 1991 that it wanted to be a soveriegn nation, and has had two revolutions and fought a war since 2014 to stay that way."
You are not understanding what Trump meant. He did not mean that Ukraine might CHOOSE to become part of Russia. He meant that it could happen against their will, and might well happen if a peace deal is not done. He meant: you'd better be flexible, or you could lose your statehood. It was a threat.
This is negotiating posturing like his previous threat to Putin that he could double down on sanctions ("taxes, tariffs, sanctions") if Putin is not cooperative about making a deal.
After this week we are going to have to stop using " Western" to describe policies or actions. "American", "European" and maybe even "Nordic". No such thing as Western anymore.
Taiwan: my hope is that Taiwan sets up a drone wall around their homeland that impedes the PLA’s access to the island skies. It would be fantastic for the PLA’s Air Force to not have any accidents with said drones, but if they do, my belief is that PLA pilots should have stayed away from the drones.
Ukraine: my hope is that Ukraine’s negotiation team sets some high negotiating walls in the talks. I don’t believe they should negotiate in the press but should use the press for PR to say Ukraine is open to reasonable negotiations.
Drone wars: It is perhaps noteworthy that in the past week or three reported Russian artillery losses have gone, up to my eye markedly. In addition, it seems to me that I am seeing more Ukraine reports than in times past of small tactical advances. A 'peace' negotiation with neither Europe not Ukraine present is unlikely to have much effect. As always, the more professional eye of the substack owner herehere likely has a much better perspective.
Agreed. Ukraine and Europe have no reason to abide by a deal cooked up by Putin and agreed to by the current US administration.
A pretty good reason to abide by such a deal will be if Trump makes any U.S. assistance conditional upon it. Which is pretty much what Trump has threatened.
Whether Europe can (or will be willing to) replace lost U.S. assistance is questionable. Whether Ukraine survives even with Western assistance at the same level is also questionable.
You yourself quoted Zelensky saying that Ukraine would likely not survive without U.S. assistance.
This is an ugly picture indeed, unjust as hell, but it's the reality of where we are right now.
The events of last week have thoroughly confused me. I thought I have some vague idea of the plan from US side, but I was definitely wrong - unless there’s layers upon layers of subterfuge, which now I doubt.
I would like to believe that Europe as a whole can step up, but I doubt it, today. Maybe in 2-3 years.
And regarding Taiwan, I read quite a few comments saying it’s all smoke and mirrors, but I tend to agree with your assessment that this is rehearsal, not just exercise.
We’ll see what the future holds, but it does look grim.
Well, I can’t argue with your analysis of the Trump administration’s latest comments re developments and commitments in Europe. Whilst none of it should have been unexpected, the incoherent statements from Hegseth, Vance & Trump should give no one any illusions as to where the US sees its future. Remember it was Trumps negotiations (in his first term) with the Taliban that led to the eventual withdrawal of NATO troops from Afghanistan. The Afghan government was left out of these negotiations - sound familiar?
Hegseth & Vance may have done Europe a favour - if they can act in a concerted manner.
The EU as a whole, is more than strong enough to take on Russia, even to the extent of being a fighting force in Ukraine and not just a peace keeping force i.e. a European Army. The EU does not really need America if it puts its mind to it, but the US may find that it needs the EU, at least to buy weapons and gas.
Trumps musings on the issues surrounding Ukraine and Europe will give them no comfort and no walk back from Trump or his minions should be entertained, is Europe up to the challenge?
How does this affect us here in Australia? Do we forsake our links with US? Is it time for Australia to form stronger links with Japan, New Zealand, South Korea and the Philippines along the lines of NATO or the European equivalent. Can we develop our own independent defence industry? Do we really need to spend $370 billion for 8 submarines which may or may not be ready by 2050’s? What if China invades Taiwan in 2028?
Can we trust the US ever again? This current administration of Trump’s is just a cohort of yes men (with Tulsi Gabbard now to added to the mix) with maligned intent. Look what happened to Putin when he surrounded himself with yes men.
Thank you.
"'They (Ukraine) may make a deal, they may not make a deal. They may be Russian someday, or they may not be Russian someday.'
"Really? Ukraine made it very clear in 1991 that it wanted to be a soveriegn nation, and has had two revolutions and fought a war since 2014 to stay that way."
You are not understanding what Trump meant. He did not mean that Ukraine might CHOOSE to become part of Russia. He meant that it could happen against their will, and might well happen if a peace deal is not done. He meant: you'd better be flexible, or you could lose your statehood. It was a threat.
This is negotiating posturing like his previous threat to Putin that he could double down on sanctions ("taxes, tariffs, sanctions") if Putin is not cooperative about making a deal.
After this week we are going to have to stop using " Western" to describe policies or actions. "American", "European" and maybe even "Nordic". No such thing as Western anymore.
Taiwan: my hope is that Taiwan sets up a drone wall around their homeland that impedes the PLA’s access to the island skies. It would be fantastic for the PLA’s Air Force to not have any accidents with said drones, but if they do, my belief is that PLA pilots should have stayed away from the drones.
Ukraine: my hope is that Ukraine’s negotiation team sets some high negotiating walls in the talks. I don’t believe they should negotiate in the press but should use the press for PR to say Ukraine is open to reasonable negotiations.