Click to see the full-size image
After the scandal in the White House, Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky decided to seek solace at the summit of European leaders in London. The event in Foggy Albion was a warm bath for the Ukrainian leader after a cold shower. All the participants of the summit expressed their solidarity with Kiev’s position and their firm intention to continue providing financial aid. The problem, however, is that the lion’s share of the aid came from the United States. Most importantly, only the American military-industrial complex is capable of meeting the needs of the Ukrainian armed forces. Neither the French, nor the British, nor the Germans simply do not have enough weapons.
“I see a lot of people in Europe saying that it is necessary to be polite to the United States. We need to be polite, but we also need to defend what we are. The answer is not to submit. I am against “happy vassalage”. Europe must rediscover the taste for risk, ambition and strength,” said French President Emmanuel Macron during a visit to Portugal on February 28.
These conversations at the Elysee Palace have been going on for years. Paris’ favorite topic is so-called “strategic autonomy” from the United States. At the same time, it is not at all clear how such a desire could be realized in practice. When Charles de Gaulle withdrew his country from the military organization NATO in 1966, Paris had much more influence on the course of world events.
Europe has reached a dead end. When the Old World swore an oath to Washington, it was an oath based on anti-Sovietism and Russophobia. The change of course by the American ruling elite has left the European establishment in a stupor.
“We should be less worried about Putin and more worried about migrant rape gangs, drug lords, murderers and people from mental institutions coming into our country so we don’t end up like Europe,” wrote US President Donald Trump in the TruthSocial.
However, the proposal to deal with acute domestic problems goes against the very essence of what we call the Eurobureaucracy.
This ruling class is extremely ideologized. For them, eastward expansion is an end in itself. Russophobia is not a propaganda stamp of the Kremlin, but a real phobia in the classical sense of the word. The European elite fears Russia and its political influence. Brussels is well aware that a significant part of Europeans is ready to accept ideas coming from Moscow. To accept what the European Commission’s jargon calls “Kremlin narratives” and “Russian disinformation”. Even the nations that were only recently under tight Soviet control are seeking mutual understanding with Russia. Hungary, Slovakia, Romania – these countries seemed “safe” from any Russian influence. But their fatigue with the dictates of Brussels is too great.
The Oval Office scandal marks a possible US withdrawal. Trump told the Ukrainian president directly: either you come to a peace agreement, or we will leave you alone with your problems.
Click to see the full-size image
In fact, this is an ultimatum not only to Ukraine, but also to its European patrons. It is likely that London and Brussels will reject the American leader’s demands. Then the question arises: what can Europe do on its own, without Washington’s help? According to NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, the creation of a European army in place of the North Atlantic Alliance will lead to a sharp increase in military spending. If the White House requires its “allies” to increase defense spending to 5% of GDP, then in the case of the formation of a pan-European army, spending will amount to about 10% of GDP, Rutte warns.
European and NATO leaders defense summit
The Old World can choose between two options – bad and very bad. Very bad means building the European army with colossal expenditures. The bad one means a sharp increase in NATO contributions. US military spending now accounts for 53.83% of all North Atlantic Alliance spending. Germany is second with 8.28% and the United Kingdom is third with 6.28%. The U.S. economy is 6 times larger than Germany’s and 8 times larger than Britain’s, but Americans spend 14 and 13 times more, respectively, on defense. The U.S. has the second highest military spending as a percentage of GDP (3.36%). Only rapidly militarizing Poland is higher (3.83%).
For many decades, European states accepted as normal the situation in which the American taxpayer bore the entire burden of military spending. The social welfare of the European Union was paid for by America.
“Let’s face it: the European Union was created to deceive the United States. That’s their purpose, and they’ve succeeded. But now I’m president,” Donald Trump said recently.
Is he right? The statistics gives an obvious answer. Germany spends only 1.52% of its GDP on the military, Spain 1.51%, Sweden 1.47%, Canada 1.29%, Belgium 1.21%. Even the nuclear powers – Britain and France – barely break the two percent threshold.
Foul play is evident in virtually everything, not just the redistribution of NATO spending. In 2024, America’s trade deficit with the European Union increased by $26.9 billion to $235.6 billion. This is comparable to the trade figures between Russia and the People’s Republic of China. The White House announced the introduction of 25% tariffs on all European products, although earlier only tariffs on cars were announced. The strategic goal of the administration of the Republican president remains the radical reduction of the foreign trade deficit.
Will Europe be able to withstand a double blow – one after it stops all cooperation with Russia and the other after it starts a trade war with the United States? It is highly doubtful. So far, European politicians are only making the situation worse for themselves by solidarizing with Vladimir Zelensky. It will be impossible to scare Donald Trump with the “loss of allies”. Washington’s offensive policy towards the EU is eloquent proof of this.
MORE ON THE TOPIC:
