If we are going to think, let's think everything through.
If not by war, then how else can Russia get its way on the part of Ukraine it does not territorially occupy?
That's what Putin & Lavrov are thinking through right now (and not for the first time) - let's not kid ourselves!
I mean they don't want Zakarpattia (which they think is Hungarian, Putin visited the place in his youth and was told - the funny dress is Hungarian), Lviv/Lvov/Lemberg (which they consider is part of Poland, it was the best Polish university until 1939), and they'd be happy splitting all Wallachia (Southwest of Odessa) to Romania or Moldavia (which it really is, Stalin stole it) + they don't want the bits they feel they cannot manage or develop (much west of the Dniepr and "West-Kyiv" which would be a troublenest of permanent revolt) but they surely consider everything East of the Dniepr Russian speaking heartland and are content to invest "whatever it takes" in the place.
Besides, that debottlenecks the logistics of "Russian" Belarus" (Bela Rus = White Russia) to the Black Sea and locks it into Russia indefinitely, ahead of a merger as autonomous republic into the Federation (many precedents).
Blood creeps where it cannot flow.
If rest Ukraine joins the EU, the population loads up and moves further west (see: German reunification, where the East Länder spun off AfD and BSW). That opens the door for other approaches (the EUs flaw not to think that through). The more billions the EU pores into rest Ukraine, the more Ukrainians "Go West!"
It seems to me Trump just needs to broker a ceasefire, however crafted. Once there is a ceasefire, he can arbitrarily switch terms - it does not matter. No one will take up arms again from there. So he may be fooling Ukraine, Russia, the EU, the US Congress, and even his own administration and Melania.
I think that insight comes with doing the job a second time. He is shrewd enough now.
Yes, Entirely agree, Erik. Trump 2 is better and very different for two basic reasons. 1) This is a guy who can learn on the job (like outside governors Reagan and Clinton) 2) He has a real MAGA team of capable loyal aides around him this time (Vance, Bobby, Rubio, Hegseth, Kash, Pam Bondi) so he doesn’t need to lean on deep state creatures this time around. And boy, it shows!
I agree Erik. For example, not including Zelensky in the meeting with Putin, I know Trump has a strategic reason for this… waiting to see what it is, what do you think?
Hey Terri, I think part of it is obviously making it clear in realist terms who is who and what is what; Zelenskyy is utterly dependent on US military aid; it is not autonomous it does not have agency. Neither does Europe, as Starmer made pathetically clear yesterday (no peacekeeping without an American security backup). What Putin and Trump are both saying is that only great powers can really move the needle in terms of policy. That is true, but it also humbles the others by making power realties clear
Yes, thank you John! I also feel that this is how Trump “handles” Putin, I can’t think of a better word right now. I imagine Putin gloating that he is the important one (what you are saying) but it indirectly gives Trump the power to negotiate a more realistic ending to the war. I am having trouble putting it into words, but feel there is an element of Psychology here.
Maybe they are baiting Putin, hoping he will pour even more frivolous resources into his ideological reunification projects. Of course, the Americans (and Chinese) know he cannot actually afford it, not just economically but in broader strategic terms, so he will eventually run out of momentum and quicken his relegation out of the top flight.
Maybe this also reinforces the idea that shifting focus to Asia is the sensible response for our US friends. It also does Europe a favour, assuming they can move past the humiliation and get their house in order.
On the other hand, Putin has humiliated many a Western leader. The stalemate (at least in the first round of talks) in the current process is no doubt deliberate on his part (you called this too, John, lottery numbers next week, please!). It is not in his national interest to encourage the notion that Trump is some sort of superhero. Putin remains a truly frightening figure. He is a realist, but country miles away from being an ethical one.
Trump just said, Zelenskyy has just a 4% approval rating and his mandate is up. Chuck Zelenskyy in the dust bin. Ukraine will be better off without him and more easily sign a ceasefire. Mission accomplished.
Incredibly disappointing, but as you say, a predictably apathetic outcome. The meeting should have been in Kiev to show some bottle anyway.
A backstop can only be just that, not a front, middle, and back. The only real backstop should be the US nuclear deterrent on EU soil. Everything else must be the responsibility of the EU and its allies, and it should be a matter of European and national pride to do its own work. I reckon Vance may have listened to that.
Yes, maybe Europe has been relegated on the world stage. But in football, when you get relegated, the management team is sacked, resources are reallocated, and a new ethos is brought in to rebuild and push for promotion back into the top flight. One for later, I hope, John. What does this rebuilt European team look like, and what strategies does it need to get back into the Premiership? Or is the EU just Leeds United FC, once a great force that spent beyond its means, believed it was too big to fail, and found itself in successive relegations?
If the best vision for young Europeans is a future spent managing decline, then something has gone badly wrong. Where is their shining city on a hill?
I’ll have a Hells beer in the Alps now and try not to feel guilty about it.
Entirely agree Kieran, with both you and Ike.The US should be the nuclear backstop, and the balancing power of last resort; everything else after 75 long years should be Europe. This would be the basis of an enduring transatlantic partnership that actually worked. Yes, my relegation language was purposeful; clever of you to pick up on it. A very different Europe (confederal, state centric) with new management has a chance to rise. The continent has an educated populace, great wealth and the ability to come back-history is never over. But all that is needed and now to come back to the premier league
I am not a big beer drinker, or drinker as a matter of fact. But I did look up that beer, and it’s a German Lager. I love Lagers and am 50% German, my maiden name is Hartman. I would drink that! Cheers!
Hi Terri! That is a distinguished maiden name. My old man always said, “If you are going to poison yourself, at least do it with something you like.” Fortunately, in Germany, their beer purity law, the Reinheitsgebot, means most of the beer is top notch. Sometimes, regulation actually works!
Anyway, and more importantly, anything tastes great in the right company. Who knows? Here's to hoping that one day we will share a dry cab!
If the USA needs to give a guarantee, then US boots need to be on the ground in Ukraine, either now, or sent in upon the failure of some ceasefire. In which case, what would the European boots be for?
The only real question is, can Russia pump up its birth rates and develop its economy, St. Petersburg to Volgograd (or shall I say, Mariupol or Sebastopol) and Minsk (yes!) to St. Vladimir in the East (Vladivostok) and Sakhalin, with outlets onto the Atlantic Ocean, the Black Sea to the Middle East and the Pacific Ocean.
If the answer is yes, Russia will be a tremendous place to invest in. It may well outperform Europe by a significant margin in a sustainable way. The logistics to achieve this are frankly daunting, even more than the demographics. If not, back to $.
As to you first point, Erik, its entirely in line with the podcast; this isn’t European strategic autonomy or some new sort of division of labour; its the same old adage: America must do everything in the end. A non-starter
As to the second, no; Russia is a declining power, Pumping up birth rates next to impossible, and no sign of economic diversification. But a declining great power (and still at the top table) remains both capable and dangerous, even if not in the league of US and China
Trump is waging war on planned parenthood and abortion (see: March for Life) and just endorsed insurance cover for IVF. One person who gets the importance of birth rates. Let's see what the impact will be.
Hi John, You are a great collector! As well as being a superior political risk analyst and history expert.
Books are an all consuming passion; writing, reading, owning
one zillion percent
If we are going to think, let's think everything through.
If not by war, then how else can Russia get its way on the part of Ukraine it does not territorially occupy?
That's what Putin & Lavrov are thinking through right now (and not for the first time) - let's not kid ourselves!
I mean they don't want Zakarpattia (which they think is Hungarian, Putin visited the place in his youth and was told - the funny dress is Hungarian), Lviv/Lvov/Lemberg (which they consider is part of Poland, it was the best Polish university until 1939), and they'd be happy splitting all Wallachia (Southwest of Odessa) to Romania or Moldavia (which it really is, Stalin stole it) + they don't want the bits they feel they cannot manage or develop (much west of the Dniepr and "West-Kyiv" which would be a troublenest of permanent revolt) but they surely consider everything East of the Dniepr Russian speaking heartland and are content to invest "whatever it takes" in the place.
Besides, that debottlenecks the logistics of "Russian" Belarus" (Bela Rus = White Russia) to the Black Sea and locks it into Russia indefinitely, ahead of a merger as autonomous republic into the Federation (many precedents).
Blood creeps where it cannot flow.
If rest Ukraine joins the EU, the population loads up and moves further west (see: German reunification, where the East Länder spun off AfD and BSW). That opens the door for other approaches (the EUs flaw not to think that through). The more billions the EU pores into rest Ukraine, the more Ukrainians "Go West!"
It seems to me Trump just needs to broker a ceasefire, however crafted. Once there is a ceasefire, he can arbitrarily switch terms - it does not matter. No one will take up arms again from there. So he may be fooling Ukraine, Russia, the EU, the US Congress, and even his own administration and Melania.
I think that insight comes with doing the job a second time. He is shrewd enough now.
Yes, Entirely agree, Erik. Trump 2 is better and very different for two basic reasons. 1) This is a guy who can learn on the job (like outside governors Reagan and Clinton) 2) He has a real MAGA team of capable loyal aides around him this time (Vance, Bobby, Rubio, Hegseth, Kash, Pam Bondi) so he doesn’t need to lean on deep state creatures this time around. And boy, it shows!
I agree Erik. For example, not including Zelensky in the meeting with Putin, I know Trump has a strategic reason for this… waiting to see what it is, what do you think?
Hey Terri, I think part of it is obviously making it clear in realist terms who is who and what is what; Zelenskyy is utterly dependent on US military aid; it is not autonomous it does not have agency. Neither does Europe, as Starmer made pathetically clear yesterday (no peacekeeping without an American security backup). What Putin and Trump are both saying is that only great powers can really move the needle in terms of policy. That is true, but it also humbles the others by making power realties clear
Yes, thank you John! I also feel that this is how Trump “handles” Putin, I can’t think of a better word right now. I imagine Putin gloating that he is the important one (what you are saying) but it indirectly gives Trump the power to negotiate a more realistic ending to the war. I am having trouble putting it into words, but feel there is an element of Psychology here.
Maybe they are baiting Putin, hoping he will pour even more frivolous resources into his ideological reunification projects. Of course, the Americans (and Chinese) know he cannot actually afford it, not just economically but in broader strategic terms, so he will eventually run out of momentum and quicken his relegation out of the top flight.
Maybe this also reinforces the idea that shifting focus to Asia is the sensible response for our US friends. It also does Europe a favour, assuming they can move past the humiliation and get their house in order.
On the other hand, Putin has humiliated many a Western leader. The stalemate (at least in the first round of talks) in the current process is no doubt deliberate on his part (you called this too, John, lottery numbers next week, please!). It is not in his national interest to encourage the notion that Trump is some sort of superhero. Putin remains a truly frightening figure. He is a realist, but country miles away from being an ethical one.
Trump just said, Zelenskyy has just a 4% approval rating and his mandate is up. Chuck Zelenskyy in the dust bin. Ukraine will be better off without him and more easily sign a ceasefire. Mission accomplished.
One of your predictions for 2025 then.
Yes, Erik, things are looking more than good for 2025 from the firm’s point of you. In contrast to my rivals!
Incredibly disappointing, but as you say, a predictably apathetic outcome. The meeting should have been in Kiev to show some bottle anyway.
A backstop can only be just that, not a front, middle, and back. The only real backstop should be the US nuclear deterrent on EU soil. Everything else must be the responsibility of the EU and its allies, and it should be a matter of European and national pride to do its own work. I reckon Vance may have listened to that.
Yes, maybe Europe has been relegated on the world stage. But in football, when you get relegated, the management team is sacked, resources are reallocated, and a new ethos is brought in to rebuild and push for promotion back into the top flight. One for later, I hope, John. What does this rebuilt European team look like, and what strategies does it need to get back into the Premiership? Or is the EU just Leeds United FC, once a great force that spent beyond its means, believed it was too big to fail, and found itself in successive relegations?
If the best vision for young Europeans is a future spent managing decline, then something has gone badly wrong. Where is their shining city on a hill?
I’ll have a Hells beer in the Alps now and try not to feel guilty about it.
Enjoy the beer without guilt; as for me, Sara and I will have a very nice unpretentious Italian red tonight; it still is a lovely place to live
It really is. Sounds like bliss, enjoy!
Entirely agree Kieran, with both you and Ike.The US should be the nuclear backstop, and the balancing power of last resort; everything else after 75 long years should be Europe. This would be the basis of an enduring transatlantic partnership that actually worked. Yes, my relegation language was purposeful; clever of you to pick up on it. A very different Europe (confederal, state centric) with new management has a chance to rise. The continent has an educated populace, great wealth and the ability to come back-history is never over. But all that is needed and now to come back to the premier league
I am not a big beer drinker, or drinker as a matter of fact. But I did look up that beer, and it’s a German Lager. I love Lagers and am 50% German, my maiden name is Hartman. I would drink that! Cheers!
Hi Terri! That is a distinguished maiden name. My old man always said, “If you are going to poison yourself, at least do it with something you like.” Fortunately, in Germany, their beer purity law, the Reinheitsgebot, means most of the beer is top notch. Sometimes, regulation actually works!
Anyway, and more importantly, anything tastes great in the right company. Who knows? Here's to hoping that one day we will share a dry cab!
I look forward to it!
If the USA needs to give a guarantee, then US boots need to be on the ground in Ukraine, either now, or sent in upon the failure of some ceasefire. In which case, what would the European boots be for?
The only real question is, can Russia pump up its birth rates and develop its economy, St. Petersburg to Volgograd (or shall I say, Mariupol or Sebastopol) and Minsk (yes!) to St. Vladimir in the East (Vladivostok) and Sakhalin, with outlets onto the Atlantic Ocean, the Black Sea to the Middle East and the Pacific Ocean.
If the answer is yes, Russia will be a tremendous place to invest in. It may well outperform Europe by a significant margin in a sustainable way. The logistics to achieve this are frankly daunting, even more than the demographics. If not, back to $.
As to you first point, Erik, its entirely in line with the podcast; this isn’t European strategic autonomy or some new sort of division of labour; its the same old adage: America must do everything in the end. A non-starter
As to the second, no; Russia is a declining power, Pumping up birth rates next to impossible, and no sign of economic diversification. But a declining great power (and still at the top table) remains both capable and dangerous, even if not in the league of US and China
Trump is waging war on planned parenthood and abortion (see: March for Life) and just endorsed insurance cover for IVF. One person who gets the importance of birth rates. Let's see what the impact will be.