War is in the air
Opinion
'There is a clear, present risk, particularly as Vladimir Putin does see himself as being at war with the West. The homeland is again (in peril)… Air and missile attacks will potentially cause civilian casualties (in the United Kingdom) in very large numbers.' Therefore, concludes Gen. Sir Richard Barrons, the U.K. needs to bring back air-raid sirens and air-raid drills.
I'm not making this up. Barrons, a former deputy chief of the defence staff who retired from the British Army in 2016, is not just an aging military fantasist longing to relive the Blitz he was too young to experience first time around. He co-wrote the British government's Strategic Defence Review, published last week, and the government adopted it wholesale.
It's not just the U.K. In only four months, the NATO countries of Europe have managed to talk themselves into the belief that their continent is on the brink of war. Almost the entire Russian army has been bogged down in Ukraine for three years and there is no other military threat in sight, yet the rhetoric suggests that Armageddon is just around the corner.
This is yet another consequence of that highly infectious disease, Trump Derangement Syndrome. The American president's penchant for making random radical comments, often just for the hell of it, has a way of panicking other countries into making policy decisions that are premature or just plain wrong.
For example, the European members of NATO are now convinced that the United States is cancelling its eight-decade commitment to the defence of Europe. In particular they think that the U.S. is ending its guarantee of nuclear retaliation against a Russian attack, which enabled all of them (except Britain and France) to avoid getting nuclear weapons of their own.
They are right to be concerned about all that, because that is certainly being considered by some factions in the Trump circus. But it is far too early to base policy on these concerns, because Trump himself has no idea where he is going with all this.
Could the United States end up in a de facto alliance with Russia when the dance ends (or at least pauses for a while)? Unlikely but possible, given Trump's highly personalistic style and his bizarre but undeniably very close relationship with the Russian leader.
What would become of the existing Russian-Chinese alliance in such a case? Hard to say, but Putin might prefer an American alliance that would deliver Ukraine into Russia's hands. That would be a more equal partnership (assuming continuing American decline) than Russia's current precarious alliance with a Chinese giant that has aspirations on Russian territory.
Does that then leave China free to join with Europe and the more or less free-trading countries of Asia in an effort to preserve or restore the rules-based, law-abiding world order that is under attack by Russia and the United States?
The possible permutations and combinations are almost endless.
It is unfortunately true that flurries of last-minute changes in alliances often happen just before the great powers go into a great war, but that is another reason not to rush into radical changes now. This will require a high tolerance for make-believe on the part of Europe, but wait-and-see is probably the continent's least bad strategy for the time being.
The European members of NATO should do everything possible to sustain Ukraine's resistance even when Trump cuts it off again, and rebuild their own defensive capabilities as fast as possible in case Trump does take the Russian option. But there's no need to practise bleeding, as the soldiers say: try to sustain the fiction of a united NATO as long as possible.
And if you're in need of consolation as the talk of war swamps the news, remember that the only genuinely revisionist great power at the moment is Russia. People will tell you China is revisionist too, but that is untrue apart from Taiwan. Beijing believes it can overtake the United States by economic means alone, and with Trump's help it may be right.
Gwynne Dyer's new book is Intervention Earth: Life-Saving Ideas from the World's Climate Engineers.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Vancouver Sun
33 minutes ago
- Vancouver Sun
Canadian resident accused of plot to shoot New York Jewish centre extradited to U.S.
OTTAWA — The U.S. Justice Department says a Pakistani citizen who was living in Canada has been extradited to New York, where he's accused of plotting to carry out a mass shooting at a Jewish centre. The RCMP arrested Muhammad Shahzeb Khan in Quebec last September. The Mounties said at the time he was in the process of planning a deadly attack targeting Jewish people in the U.S. and was facing charges in Canada. He is now charged in the U.S. with attempting to provide material support to a foreign terrorist organization and attempting to commit terrorism that transcends national boundaries. Start your day with a roundup of B.C.-focused news and opinion. By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder. The next issue of Sunrise will soon be in your inbox. Please try again Interested in more newsletters? Browse here. The 20-year-old is set to appear in a New York court on Wednesday. The U.S. Justice Department says Khan was planning an 'ISIS-inspired mass shooting' around the one-year anniversary of the Hamas attack in Israel on Oct. 7, 2024. Jay Clayton, U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, said in a statement that Khan planned to 'use automatic weapons to kill as many members of our Jewish community as possible, all in support of ISIS.' The statement said Khan started posting on social media and communicating with people on encrypted messaging apps about his support for ISIS around November 2023. After he shared ISIS propaganda online, he started communicating with undercover law enforcement officers. He told them he and an American associate, who is not named in the statement, were planning an attack. The Justice Department statement said Khan told the undercover officers to buy AR-style assault rifles, ammunition and other materials, and he gave them details about how he planned to cross the border. Last August, he changed his planned target and told the undercover officers he had decided to carry out a mass shooting at a Jewish centre in Brooklyn on or around Oct. 7, 2024. 'During one communication, Khan noted that 'if we succeed with our plan this would be the largest attack on U.S. soil since 9/11,'' the statement said. Khan tried to reach the U.S. border on Sept. 4, 2024. The Justice Department said he used three separate cars to travel through Canada toward the border and was stopped by Canadian authorities near Ormstown, Que., about 20 km from the border. The allegations have not been proven in court. If convicted, Khan faces a maximum sentence of life in prison. Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here .
Toronto Star
an hour ago
- Toronto Star
Mark Carney says sacrifice is necessary to pay for defence spending. So what will Canadians be asked to do?
Mark Carney 's bold new plan to increase Canada's defence spending comes with two price tags. The prime minister's announcement was clear on one of them: more than $9 billion will be injected into military spending this year alone, and increases in the years after. The other price — 'sacrifice' — got a mention from Carney, but little more by way of detail. Federal Politics Canada plans huge boost in defence spending to hit NATO target by year's end, Carney says Prime Minister Mark Carney tore up Canada's timelines for boosted military spending on Monday 'None of these goals will come easily or quickly,' Carney said, listing the ways in which a stronger defence budget fits into his larger plans to make Canada a bigger, bolder, more independent nation. 'All will require ambition, collaboration and yes, on occasion, sacrifice.' ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW Carney was asked at a news conference later what he meant by this. Did it mean, for instance, that all those dollars for defence would come ahead of health-care spending? This is where the prime minister got vague. He said: 'There's no true security without economic strength, and this is true for defence and security. It's true for our social programs as well. We can't redistribute what we don't have.' Carney, by his own admission, is still learning how to be a politician, but on this and in other areas, he is proving to be a quick study. It is very hard for politicians to ask citizens to make sacrifices. We saw this during the COVID pandemic, when governments and public-health authorities asked an awful lot of the citizens, whether that was mandatory vaccines, wearing a mask, or submitting to lockdowns for weeks and months on end. Canadians were remarkably good about these demands on them, by and large, but there's also no question that it took its toll on them too. The convoy protest was the most outward expression of the pent-up frustration among some of the population, but experts are also drawing some straight lines between the pandemic restrictions and the rising resistance to vaccines of other types too, such as measles. Star Columnists Opinion Andrew Phillips: Mark Carney takes a risk by choosing guns over butter The prime minister announced a 17 per cent hike in military spending on Monday. 'It will be a This is all to say that Carney is probably wise to speak in only general terms of what trade-offs the government — and Canadians — will have to make to turn Canada into a serious, fighting force. ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW Earlier this year, Kevin Page, the former parliamentary budget officer, laid out for Global News what could be required to bring Canada's defence spending up to the target of two per cent of gross domestic product — which Carney said on Monday would now happen by the end of this fiscal year. Page didn't sugar-coat it. He said it would require either big spending cuts, or a budget deficit or a tax hike, or some combination of these measures. Raising the GST by one percentage point, Page offered as an example, would bring an extra $10 billion — that's just slightly more than Carney is promising to give defence this year. That last option would be political poison in a time when Canadians are reeling from affordability challenges and the havoc that Donald Trump's tariffs are wreaking on the economy. Besides, a government that just cut the carbon levy because of its unpopularity, which just received unanimous support for tax-cut measures last week, is unlikely to turn around and ask Canadians to pay more GST. Opinion Althia Raj: Mark Carney can't be allowed to ram through his plan to build big Bill C-5 has been quickly panned by Indigenous groups, human rights organizations, and There's the option of increasing taxes only on the wealthy, but Carney is in the midst of building back Liberals' standing with business and corporate Canada, which saw itself — rightly or wrongly — as under siege from Justin Trudeau's government. Assuming that running a deficit is also not on brand with Carney's fiscal-manager reputation, thus, not on at all, that leaves this government looking for big savings. Everyone always thinks this is a good idea, right up until their services or benefits or jobs get cut. As former PM Jean Chrétien liked to say, everyone wants to go to heaven but nobody wants to die. None of this is to pour cold water on the idea of this big, bold boost in Canada's defence ambitions. Carney's speech on Monday was eloquent, even occasionally poetic, on this score. One of my favourite lines: 'In a darker, more competitive world, Canadian leadership will be defined not just by the strength of our values, but also by the value of our strength.' The announcement too, is buying the Liberals a lot of good words from unaccustomed places: the defence community and Conservatives. It will also give Carney and Canada some added heft at this weekend's G-7 meeting, which this country is hosting in Kananaskis, AB. Federal Politics Analysis Mark Carney revives tough talk about America and warns 'a new imperialism threatens' A Canadian government official told the Star that it is 'difficult to say whether or not we'll The prime minister is, then, to borrow from his own phrase, seeing some immediate value for his strong words on defence. Where the value of that strength will be tested is in the cost — not just the $9 billion the government is promising to lay out this year, but in the as-yet unspecified 'sacrifice' it requires from Canadians. Politics Headlines Newsletter Get the latest news and unmatched insights in your inbox every evening Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. Please enter a valid email address. Sign Up Yes, I'd also like to receive customized content suggestions and promotional messages from the Star. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Politics Headlines Newsletter You're signed up! You'll start getting Politics Headlines in your inbox soon. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page.
Winnipeg Free Press
an hour ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Army restores the names of seven bases that lost their Confederate-linked names under Biden
WASHINGTON (AP) — Seven Army bases whose names were changed in 2023 because they honored Confederate leaders are all reverting back to their original names, the Army said Tuesday. The announcement came just hours after President Donald Trump previewed the decision, telling troops at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, that he was changing the names back. Fort Bragg, which was changed to Fort Liberty by the Biden administration, was the first to have its original name restored after the Army found another person with the same last name. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who was with Trump at Fort Bragg, signed an order restoring the name in February. 'Can you believe they changed that name in the last administration for a little bit?' Trump said. 'We'll forget all about that.' In March, Hegseth reversed the decision changing Fort Benning in Georgia to Fort Moore. To restore the original names of the additional seven bases, the Army once again found service members with the same last names to honor. Those bases are Fort A.P. Hill, Fort Pickett and Fort Robert E. Lee in Virginia, Fort Gordon in Georgia, Fort Hood in Texas, Fort Polk in Louisiana and Fort Rucker in Alabama. The decision strips names chosen in 2023 to honor top leaders, such as President Dwight D. Eisenhower, as well as Black soldiers and women. No women are included in the new Army list. There was no immediate cost estimate for changing all the signs at the bases, just two years after they were revamped. Fort A.P. Hill Originally it was named after Confederate Gen. Ambrose P. Hill, before being renamed Fort Walker after Mary Edwards Walker, a doctor who treated soldiers in the Civil War and later received a Medal of Honor. Now it will be named to commemorate three different people: Medal of Honor recipients Lt. Col. Edward Hill, 1st Sgt. Robert A. Pinn and Pvt. Bruce Anderson for heroism during the Civil War. Fort Pickett Fort Pickett was changed to Fort Barfoot in honor of Tech Sgt. Van Barfoot, a Medal of Honor recipient who served in World War II. It will now honor 1st Lt. Vernon W. Pickett. He received the Distinguished Service Cross for heroism during World War II when he fired grenades while pinned down by enemy machine gun fire and destroyed enemy positions. He was captured, then escaped and rejoined his unit, but was killed in action. Fort Lee Fort Lee was changed to a hyphenated name, Fort Gregg-Adams, and was the only one to commemorate someone who remained alive at the time — Lt. Gen. Arthur J. Gregg. He was known as a logistics leader and died last year. Lt. Col. Charity Adams — the other half of the name — led the first female Black unit of the Army deployed in World War II. Fort Lee will now be named for Pvt. Fitz Lee, who received the Medal of Honor for heroism during the Spanish-American War, when he moved under fire to rescue wounded comrades. Fort Gordon Fort Gordon was changed to Fort Eisenhower to commemorate the former president's time leading Allied forces in Europe in World War II. It will now be named for Medal of Honor recipient Master Sgt. Gary I. Gordon. He was honored for his valor during the 1993 Battle of Mogadishu in Somalia, where he defended wounded crew members at a helicopter crash site and held off an advancing enemy force. Fort Hood Fort Hood was changed to Fort Cavazos in honor of Gen. Richard Cavazos, the Army's first Hispanic four-star, who served in the Korean War and got the Distinguished Service Cross. It will now honor Col. Robert B. Hood. He received the Distinguished Service Cross for heroism during World War I, when he directed artillery fire in France. Fort Polk Fort Polk was changed to Fort Johnson after Black Medal of Honor recipient Sgt. William Henry Johnson, who served in World War I. It will now honor Silver Star recipient Gen. James H. Polk. Then-Col. Polk was honored for gallantry during World War II, when he led reconnaissance and combat missions under fire. He later served as head of U.S. Army Europe. Fort Rucker Fort Rucker was named Fort Novosel after Medal of Honor recipient Chief Warrant Officer Michael Novosel, who served in World War II and Vietnam. It will now honor Capt. Edward W. Rucker. He received the Distinguished Service Cross for heroism in World War I when he flew deep behind enemy lines in a daring air battle over France.
