Latest news with #Atlanticists
New European
26-03-2025
- General
- New European
Letters: We can't afford to alienate young men
The statistics might not be static. For instance, in 2000, the ratio of female to male undergraduates was 52.5 to 47.5, which has since widened to 57 to 43. There may be a narrowing in the gap between female and male pay. If this narrowing is due to more opportunities being afforded to women, brilliant. If it's primarily because young men are becoming less educated and less skilled, not so brilliant. 'The REAL crisis in young men' by James Ball (TNE #428) was really interesting, though I don't fully agree with assuming that in 10-20 years' time, males now between the ages of 15-25(ish) will have the same rates of employment, wages, etc as men in their 30s and 40s today. Overall, I agree that the 'crisis' in young men is probably overblown. However, I think it's also important to consider that there may be problems that affect young men specifically. Denying these, if they do exist, may further alienate men who feel elements of their life are unfair. Will Hughes The crisis for young men, and young people in general, is rooted in our attitudes to consumerism and employment. Consumerism has drowned us all in a comfort of shiny stuff, but whereas for us older folk that may be attainable because of final-salary pensions and the inexorable rising value of homes, for the young the pressure to have 'the right stuff' is onerous and generally unaffordable. As for employment, much of the fun in getting jobs and extracting adventure out of them, as I experienced in the 1970s, is now subsumed into the key performance indicator world of many mass employers. There seems to be no fun in employment now, just an almost religious demand to worship the company and maintain it above all else. Keith Brisley Perhaps the lack of father figures and poor discipline in schools are factors in the alienation felt by young men. It is easy to lose direction if you aren't given boundaries and a good role model. Elspeth Guyan I am sure the lack of male primary teachers and increasingly secondary teachers has a negative effect on boys at school. I can imagine if there were 90% male teachers and 10% female teachers in primary schools, questions would be asked. Stephen Brown US obsession Re: Alastair Campbell on the UK obsession with Donald Trump (Diary, TNE #428). You can hardly expect that America's number one vassal state, the United Kingdom, should not have an obsession with Trump and whatever is happening in the US. We have a political and mainstream media class stacked to the roof with gushing Atlanticists, whose preference for adopting political and economic policy from the USA, rather than from our European neighbours with more comparable conditions to our own, has led us to the decline we are now experiencing. Time for Europe and the UK to reconcile and start building a new 'Third Way', between the USA and China, or keep heading towards Airstrip One. Paul Wildish After French politician Raphaël Glucksmann remarked that since the USA has chosen to side with 'tyrants', they would have no further use for the Statue of Liberty, White House spokesperson Karoline Leavitt replied: 'It's only because of the United States of America that the French are not speaking German right now.' I am sure France is, and has always been, most grateful for the bravery and sacrifices of the American servicemen and women who fought with the allies to liberate France during the second world war. It is perhaps appropriate to remind Ms Leavitt, however, that had it not been for the victory of the French navy over the British at the Battle of the Chesapeake in 1781, Donald J Trump, JD Vance and even Ms Leavitt herself might find themselves obliged to speak English right now! Imagine that! John Castell Suffolk Time to wake up 'Are you addicted to copium?' by Matthew d'Ancona (TNE #428) shows how the left needs radical change in their tactics. To wake up would be a good start! If you keep wishing for the status quo, you are always going to be disappointed. Adam Primhak Whilst I agree with Matt d'Ancona's view on 'copium', I take issue with his theory that voters are voting on more ideological grounds as opposed to what benefits them economically. Matt cites Brexit as an example of this. However, how many times were voters told that everything would be fine if the UK left the EU? That all the warnings were 'Project Fear' and that additional money would go to the NHS. The fact this was all nonsense is beside the point. How many Brexit voters voted to leave because they thought they and the country would be better off? Trump has a hard core of supporters for whom he can do no wrong. That's not everyone who voted for him, though. Vox pops after the election showed that many people didn't like the man as a person, but voted for him as the best bet to secure the border, or defend against fears over trans rights, or because people were struggling financially. The biggest danger is that so much misinformation will be shown that it's becoming harder for people to know what to do. Robert Allen The potency of the old political machine has long been spent. Sadly nobody acknowledged its demise. We preferred to carry on as if all were well. Donald Trump promised change rather than another resurrection attempt. Change is what he delivered, proving again we should be careful what we wish for. And yes, the question of why Trump was re-elected is key to re-establishing basic boundaries, without which it's difficult to know where north lies. If we don't know that, how can we guide ourselves? David Wright Beating populism Re: 'Populism's Monty Python problem' by Sunder Katwala (TNE #428). The key to taking on the populist right is to challenge them on social media platforms. I dithered about doing this. I even migrated to Bluesky… but that really is not enough. Disgusted as we should be about the far right resurgence, we have to challenge them head-on. Progressives need to wake up to the fact that the far right, like the Devil, have all the best (superficial) tunes. Don't put yourself in a silo. Challenge and confront. David Newble 'Populism's Monty Python problem' and several other pieces in TNE #428 echo the theme of the disintegration of the extreme right. And of course, we're all familiar with the same phenomenon on the left. It almost seems as if there's something about extremism that tends towards a demand for absolute doctrinal purity. I chose that phrase deliberately. As a minister, I look at the 'spectrum' of Christian faith, and I notice that we have similar tendencies at the extremes. Tony Jones Sunder Katwala's piece on the split among Reform's MPs makes several good points. But the Faragist parties' problems go beyond personality conflicts, and the need to avoid putting off mainstream voters. Farage's malign genius has been to create electorally popular parties to the right of the Tories but decidedly not neo-fascist. But his electoral success is also his undoing: his parties are all defined by what they are against, and therefore implode on impact with real power and responsibility: becoming the main opposition in Lincolnshire in 2013, running Thanet in 2016 and forming a parliamentary group in 2024. Are Ukip or Reform libertarian or authoritarian? Even more basically, are they racist or anti-racist? What would their policies be? Once they have to govern or at least cohere as a party, they implode. Anthony Thacker Hinckley, Leicestershire On populism and Python, I'd like to point out that Nigel Farage is not the messiah – he's a very naughty boy. Keith Hobbs Pithy nicknames Peter Trudgill's column in TNE #428, where he wrote of French soldiers in the Hundred Years War calling the English 'les goddams', reminded me of a modern linguistic change. As a child, I was taught that the French call British people 'les rosbifs' after our supposed love of the Sunday carvery. I am assured that this is passé: thanks to the territorial and mating calls of inebriated football fans and other tourists, Brits in France are now referred to as 'les fuckoffs'. Plus ça change… Bill Thomas Weston-super-Mare, North Somerset (studied under Prof Trudgill at Reading, 1979-83) German perfection? Re: Tanit Koch's remarks about Germany's electoral system (Germansplaining, TNE #428). Given that the UK elected a government with a huge majority on around a third of the vote, and that Ireland takes days to count and ends up electing never-ending Fine Gael/Fianna Fáil governments, Germany is not doing too badly. Especially as the odious Christian Lindner and Sahra Wagenknecht were both evicted from the Bundestag. John Cullen Russian traitors Re: 'The horror that spawned Putin' by Lucy Ash (TNE #428). More power to the Russian anti-war protester Lyudmila Vasilyeva – she is a similar age to me and will doubtless be aware that when the Soviet Union collapsed, one of the first actions of the oligarchs who now own and control Russia was to steal the pensions from those who fought in the Great Patriotic war. We must remember and whenever possible remind them of what traitors the oligarchs, including their chief, were and continue to be. John Simpson What stitch-up? I was surprised to read that Ireland screwed the UK by ignoring European Union rules and this was condoned by EU bureaucrats (Letters, TNE #428). Contrary to what Robert Parker writes, neither is true. The minimum corporation tax agreement of 15% was only made in 2023 and was applicable from 2024, at which point the Irish tax went up from 12.5% to 15% in full conformance with the new rule. All treaties, directives and agreements in the EU are passed by the EU council (of the democratically elected governments of the sovereign members) and the EU parliament. EU bureaucrats implement the decisions of the parliament and member states. They cannot make rules themselves. If they were to favour anyone, it would surely be the three most powerful states with a total population of 200 million rather than one state, population five million? Peter Basford BELOW THE LINE Comments, conversation and correspondence from our online subscribers Re: Josh Barrie's visit to The European pub (formerly a Wetherspoon) in TNE #428. I recommend the Neverspoons app, which I have on my phone so I can avoid spending any money in Tim Martin's businesses. Russell Sage Re: 'Pick Putin's pockets to pay for the war against him' (TNE #428). I totally agree with Paul Mason, and I cannot understand why, with all the pain, hurt, terror and loss of life and property that Putin has caused since he started his unlawful invasion of Ukraine, politicians are so reluctant to spend this money. Charles Thomas I'm a big fan of the Rats in a Sack column. However, I suspect the stories are being selected specifically to raise my blood pressure! Christopher Harrison Is Keir Starmer really the 'grown-up in the room' (TNE #427)? He's kissing Trump's backside instead of standing shoulder to shoulder with Canada. The delusional belief in our 'special relationship' is absurd. Canada had THE special relationship – look where that landed. Britain needs to be back in the EU, full stop. The denialism is absurd. The majority of the electorate wants it, the economy demands it, security needs it. Lauren Smith Thanks for Everyday Philosophy's opposition to corporal punishment (TNE #427). I, like many others brought up in the 1970s, suffered this, although for my dad it was a slippery slope as he realised just how much he enjoyed it. The beatings only stopped when my sister and I grew big enough to fight back. I have three daughters and have never laid a finger on them. It doesn't work and is completely unnecessary. I want a complete ban now. Wendy Hodgson The day corporal punishment was banned in Scotland, the master at my daughter's primary school, who walked around with a leather strap in his pocket, quit. The headteacher had some difficulty in explaining his abrupt departure. Helen Dunwoodie My life experiences are similar to Nigel Warburton's. Thank you for this intelligent piece of writing. Audrey Bailey JOIN THE CONVERSATION Subscribe and download our free new app to comment and chat with our writers
Yahoo
12-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Britain has no friends, no money, and no grasp on reality
Britain stands alone in a brutish world. Our small, impoverished yet special nation has spent too long lying to itself. The horrifying reality is that we have no real friends, just interests and beliefs. If we want to ensure the security, liberty and prosperity of the British people, and as Lord Palmerston put it, be 'the champion of justice and right', we will have to do it ourselves. Nobody, least of all the greater or lesser powers, has our back, or any interest in fair play. Donald Trump's America is putting itself first, reshaping the world, trashing allies and waging idiotic trade wars. Europe, mired in decadence and welfarism, is interested primarily in our military know-how, nuclear umbrella and, as always, our fisheries. Russia is a fascistic empire whose advances must be halted. China is a hostile civilisation. India doesn't really care. International institutions and courts serve as useful idiots for proto-Marxists keen to destroy the West. We comfort ourselves with tales of how we can serve as a bridge between Europe and the US, or build a coalition of the willing in Ukraine. It's inspirational stuff, but it would be madness to cling to the certainties of the past. It's time for a total reset of our assumptions, of our understanding of history, of our modus operandi, of our international role. We must reconstruct our economy, military and society for an era of trade wars, diplomatic blackmail, banditry, spheres of influence and power politics. We must embrace a neo-Gaullism with British characteristics, centred around a renewed love of country, a turbocharged, technologically advanced capitalist economy, much larger and more modern Armed Forces, a fully independent nuclear deterrent and a focus on resilience. We need to be able to operate our own military without having to rely on parts from unreliable providers, to withstand embargoes or sanctions or cyber-attacks or pipelines being blown up or star wars. We must learn from how Trump treats Ukraine, or how Biden treated Israel, suspending arms sales. We must be able to project power and defend trade routes worldwide. We must retain as much free trade as possible, and slash tariffs further on friendly nations, but make sure that we can always get hold of essential goods and commodities. We can no longer be naive, and assume that mercantilists who leverage trade for warfare are in fact followers of Milton Friedman or David Ricardo. In many cases, we will have to produce more military equipment in Britain, requiring reindustrialisation and greater steel manufacturing; in others, ensure a diversity of trading partners, buying weapons from Israel and Poland as well as the US, or food from Argentina rather than Spain. The Atlanticists and the pro-Europeans alike are wrong. We should be friendly to the US and EU, but beholden to neither. America saved Britain during World War I; it rescued us from totalitarianism in World War II; it destroyed Soviet tyranny in the Cold War. It earned the eternal gratitude of mankind. But those of us who love America must acknowledge how the US ruthlessly exploited its participation in the wars to demolish Britain's financial, maritime and geopolitical power. It treats its allies as vassals, rather than equals. In Stalin's War, Sean McMeekin recounts how Roosevelt suggested to Stalin in 1943 that India be taken away from Britain. It was best 'not to discuss the question of India with Mr Churchill', the US president said, arguing that America and Russia should remake India 'from the bottom, somewhat on the Soviet line'. Stalin couldn't believe his luck, or the way Roosevelt spoke of the greatest Englishman of all time. John Maynard Keynes was sidelined at Bretton Woods. The 1947 sterling crisis was precipitated by America. The US betrayed us over Suez. Ronald Reagan disappointed on the Falklands, and invaded Grenada, a Commonwealth member, without properly informing Lady Thatcher. The IRA spent decades fundraising in the US while murdering in Britain. The UK sacrificed much in Iraq and Afghanistan after 9/11 for no return; the 'special relationship' started to feel abusive. Barack Obama and Joe Biden disliked the UK, and removed Churchill's bust from the Oval Office. Obama took the EU's side over Brexit. Trump is an Anglophile, and may offer us a trade deal, but has no interest in our perspective. Yet while America is now explicit in its leveraging of power for transactional purposes, Europe isn't the answer. The EU is an imperialist technocracy with an obsession with Hegelian dialectics and a hatred for traitor-nations that have thrown off the shackles of the acquis communautaire. Membership of the EU crippled Britain: our parliamentary tradition, common law and what Hayek called our true individualism, the source of much of our exceptionalism, were eroded; our ties with the Commonwealth largely severed. The French (via agricultural subsidies and the containment of Germany) and the Germans (via a Germanic euro and the single market in goods) got far more out of the EU than we did; the European services sector was never liberalised, discriminating against Britain's comparative advantage. The EU treated us abominably when we left, seizing partial control of Northern Ireland. We were regarded as enemies during Covid. In December 2020, France shut its borders to Britain, imposing a blockade that could have led to shortages of food and vaccines; the excuse was the Kent variant. In March 2021, Ursula von der Leyen threatened to block vaccine exports to the UK and to cancel private contracts. We remain too dependent on the EU, and on the Calais-Dover bottleneck. Any military help we offer Europe must come as a quid pro quo for easier trade. The Government should immediately launch a Year Zero review of all policies, on the postulate that we cannot rely on anyone. We need to decouple from China when it comes to high-tech. We must scrap net zero, and produce more of our own energy. Faster productivity growth is required, necessitating a bonfire of regulations, a smaller state and reduced tax. We need to pull out of the ECHR and UN conventions to restrict migration and forge a cohesive civic nationalism. Our early 21st-century settlement was predicated on an imaginary utopia in which we expected fair dealing from friends. In today's dog-eat-dog world, we must stand up for ourselves. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Telegraph
12-03-2025
- Politics
- Telegraph
Britain has no friends, no money, and no grasp on reality
Britain stands alone in a brutish world. Our small, impoverished yet special nation has spent too long lying to itself. The horrifying reality is that we have no real friends, just interests and beliefs. If we want to ensure the security, liberty and prosperity of the British people, and as Lord Palmerston put it, be 'the champion of justice and right', we will have to do it ourselves. Nobody, least of all the greater or lesser powers, has our back, or any interest in fair play. Donald Trump's America is putting itself first, reshaping the world, trashing allies and waging idiotic trade wars. Europe, mired in decadence and welfarism, is interested primarily in our military know-how, nuclear umbrella and, as always, our fisheries. Russia is a fascistic empire whose advances must be halted. China is a hostile civilisation. India doesn't really care. International institutions and courts serve as useful idiots for proto-Marxists keen to destroy the West. We comfort ourselves with tales of how we can serve as a bridge between Europe and the US, or build a coalition of the willing in Ukraine. It's inspirational stuff, but it would be madness to cling to the certainties of the past. It's time for a total reset of our assumptions, of our understanding of history, of our modus operandi, of our international role. We must reconstruct our economy, military and society for an era of trade wars, diplomatic blackmail, banditry, spheres of influence and power politics. We must embrace a neo-Gaullism with British characteristics, centred around a renewed love of country, a turbocharged, technologically advanced capitalist economy, much larger and more modern Armed Forces, a fully independent nuclear deterrent and a focus on resilience. We need to be able to operate our own military without having to rely on parts from unreliable providers, to withstand embargoes or sanctions or cyber-attacks or pipelines being blown up or star wars. We must learn from how Trump treats Ukraine, or how Biden treated Israel, suspending arms sales. We must be able to project power and defend trade routes worldwide. We must retain as much free trade as possible, and slash tariffs further on friendly nations, but make sure that we can always get hold of essential goods and commodities. We can no longer be naive, and assume that mercantilists who leverage trade for warfare are in fact followers of Milton Friedman or David Ricardo. In many cases, we will have to produce more military equipment in Britain, requiring reindustrialisation and greater steel manufacturing; in others, ensure a diversity of trading partners, buying weapons from Israel and Poland as well as the US, or food from Argentina rather than Spain. The Atlanticists and the pro-Europeans alike are wrong. We should be friendly to the US and EU, but beholden to neither. America saved Britain during World War I; it rescued us from totalitarianism in World War II; it destroyed Soviet tyranny in the Cold War. It earned the eternal gratitude of mankind. But those of us who love America must acknowledge how the US ruthlessly exploited its participation in the wars to demolish Britain's financial, maritime and geopolitical power. It treats its allies as vassals, rather than equals. In Stalin's War, Sean McMeekin recounts how Roosevelt suggested to Stalin in 1943 that India be taken away from Britain. It was best 'not to discuss the question of India with Mr Churchill', the US president said, arguing that America and Russia should remake India 'from the bottom, somewhat on the Soviet line'. Stalin couldn't believe his luck, or the way Roosevelt spoke of the greatest Englishman of all time. John Maynard Keynes was sidelined at Bretton Woods. The 1947 sterling crisis was precipitated by America. The US betrayed us over Suez. Ronald Reagan disappointed on the Falklands, and invaded Grenada, a Commonwealth member, without properly informing Lady Thatcher. The IRA spent decades fundraising in the US while murdering in Britain. The UK sacrificed much in Iraq and Afghanistan after 9/11 for no return; the ' special relationship ' started to feel abusive. Barack Obama and Joe Biden disliked the UK, and removed Churchill's bust from the Oval Office. Obama took the EU's side over Brexit. Trump is an Anglophile, and may offer us a trade deal, but has no interest in our perspective. Yet while America is now explicit in its leveraging of power for transactional purposes, Europe isn't the answer. The EU is an imperialist technocracy with an obsession with Hegelian dialectics and a hatred for traitor-nations that have thrown off the shackles of the acquis communautaire. Membership of the EU crippled Britain: our parliamentary tradition, common law and what Hayek called our true individualism, the source of much of our exceptionalism, were eroded; our ties with the Commonwealth largely severed. The French (via agricultural subsidies and the containment of Germany) and the Germans (via a Germanic euro and the single market in goods) got far more out of the EU than we did; the European services sector was never liberalised, discriminating against Britain's comparative advantage. The EU treated us abominably when we left, seizing partial control of Northern Ireland. We were regarded as enemies during Covid. In December 2020, France shut its borders to Britain, imposing a blockade that could have led to shortages of food and vaccines; the excuse was the Kent variant. In March 2021, Ursula von der Leyen threatened to block vaccine exports to the UK and to cancel private contracts. We remain too dependent on the EU, and on the Calais-Dover bottleneck. Any military help we offer Europe must come as a quid pro quo for easier trade. The Government should immediately launch a Year Zero review of all policies, on the postulate that we cannot rely on anyone. We need to decouple from China when it comes to high-tech. We must scrap net zero, and produce more of our own energy. Faster productivity growth is required, necessitating a bonfire of regulations, a smaller state and reduced tax. We need to pull out of the ECHR and UN conventions to restrict migration and forge a cohesive civic nationalism. Our early 21st-century settlement was predicated on an imaginary utopia in which we expected fair dealing from friends. In today's dog-eat-dog world, we must stand up for ourselves.
Asia Times
03-03-2025
- Politics
- Asia Times
Ukraine debacle signals the death of Atlanticism
The public spat between Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and US President Donald Trump at the White House last week sent shockwaves through Europe, and rightly so. With Trump advocating for an end to the Ukraine war and signaling a hard shift in US policy, Europe finds itself caught in a geopolitical non-man's land. It alienated China, severed economic ties with Russia and failed to anticipate Trump's historic strategic shift. Making matters worse, Europe disqualified itself as a reliable interlocutor after EU leaders publically admitted that the Minsk negotiations were used to buy time for Ukraine's military buildup. In a few short years, Europe managed to isolate itself on the world stage. Henry Kissinger once said that the US has no permanent friends, only interests. The war in Ukraine is a case in point. Starting about 30 years ago, most European countries, influenced by a neoliberal wave in the US, elected a slew of Atlanticist-minded political leaders who agreed with US neoliberal policies. Consecutive US administrations, including Bush, Clinton and Obama, supported NATO expansion. The pretext was the spread of democracy and freedom, which obscured the geopolitical and economic reasons that can be traced to the colonial era. The Heartland Theory, developed by British geographer Halford Mackinder in the early 20th century, argued that Western hegemony relied on a divided Eurasian continent. Mackinder addressed the battle as one between emerging maritime powers (mostly Western European) and land-based powers (Russia, China, India). The development of railroads challenged the maritime hegemonic power of the West. From Halford Mackinder's Heartland Theory. Railroads changed military logistics. In the 1980s, American geopolitical strategist Zbigniew Brzezinski updated the Heartland Theory and identified Ukraine as the pivotal nation in the battle for the Eurasian continent. NATO's expansion since the 1990s was orchestrated by Brzezinski's proteges, and championed by successive US administrations. Only by keeping the Eurasian continent divided, the reasoning was, could the maritime powers of the West remain global hegemony. China's Belt & Road Initiative (BRI), which stretches across the Eurasian continent, also concerned the Atlanticists. China's Belt & Road Initiative will ultimately integrate the Eurasian continent. From an Atlanticist perspective, the Ukraine war accomplished its mission: cutting Europe off from the Eurasian continent. Blowing up the Nord Stream pipeline connecting Russia and Europe was part of the program. But the Atlanticists could not have foreseen that Trump would so drastically change the strategic chess board. The old adage 'Follow the money' still holds true. The US is facing a growing and unsustainable national debt, a perennial budget deficit and ever-growing trade deficits. These triple deficits can only be sustained as long as the dollar is the world's reserve currency. The US earns trillions as the 'toll booth' of the global dollar system. However, the US government has now borrowed US$36 trillion to cover its budget deficits. Interest payments on the national debt are larger than the defense budget, and rising. On the current trajectory, the US is heading for default or hyperinflation. Trump's priority is restoring the fiscal health of the US, and to make sure the dollar remains the world's reserve currency. It explains both his ruthless cost-cutting and why he threatens sanctions on countries that try to de-dollarize. The West was never able to convince Russia that NATO expansion to the Russian border was no threat to it. Unconcerned about the possible Russian reaction, they framed NATO expansion as an exercise of democracy and freedom. Ideology trumped pragmatism. But the climb down will be painful. Early on in the war, Western media depicted Russia as weak and corrupt, with a dying economy and an inefficient military. Overly confident or historically naive, the West relied on three pillars that crumbled one after another: – Sanctions to weaken or collapse the Russian economy and cause an uprising against Putin failed – Isolating Russia from the Global South, including China and India, failed – Inflicting strategic defeat on Russia with superior NATO weapons failed Convinced that Russia could be brought to its knees, the West did not bother to formulate a backup plan. When it became clear Russia was not to be defeated, the West flipped the script. Russia was no longer a weak state with an impotent military, it was an existential threat to Europe. Russia has an economy the size of Spain, less than one-third of the European population, and a quarter of the European defense budget (about $84 billion vs Europe's $326 billion). But Europeans are now told that if they don't defend Ukraine, they may have to fight the Russians at their own borders. Fully in denial that the end game has begun and incapable of offering peace proposals, the Europeans are doubling down on their strategic folly. They are discussing a collective European defense fund, and building up a defense industry that does not rely on the US. Experts predict that it could take ten years for Europe to reach military self-sufficiency, not to mention that a growing number of countries in Europe are expressing dissatisfaction with the Ukraine policy. Most EU leaders have approval ratings of under 30%. Europe's weakness is intrinsic and can't be papered over. A Chinese geopolitical analyst recently described the dilemma: 'Europe consists of small countries and countries that don't realize they are small (in the context of geopolitics).' Should the US, Russia, and China discuss a postwar architecture – a Yalta II – Europe may find itself relegated to the sidelines. When the chips are down, Europe lacks the strategic leverage that can be yielded by the 'Big Three.' The biggest challenge for the EU elite is to manage public opinion during the unavoidable climb-down from their ideological crusade. Since 2014, when Russia regained control of Crimea, the Western media has served as the propaganda arm of the Atlanticists, some sponsored by USAID. They demonized Putin and Russia 24/7. Anyone uttering a word of critique of Zelensky or Ukraine was depicted as a Russian asset. The non-stop barrage of anti-Russian propaganda was highly effective. A recent poll in Britain indicated 80+% in favor of boots on the ground in Ukraine. Never mind that the entire British army would fit in Wembley Stadium. The Atlanticist virus that infected Europe in the past three decades has transformed the ideological landscape. Today, the proverbial right, like the AfD in Germany, calls for peace, while the proverbial left, including the 'Greens', are the cheerleaders for continuing the war. This historic role reversal is hardly discussed in Europe. Europe's Green Parties have roots in the student uprisings of 1968 and the anti-Vietnam war protests in the early 1970s. The Dutch Green Party resulted from the merger of pacifists and environmentalists, yet the 'Green' major of Amsterdam displayed a burned-out Russian tank in the center of Amsterdam as a war trophy. When peace returns to Ukraine, Europe would do well to analyze the ideological role reversal that contributed to the Ukraine tragedy.
