Imagine that you have an aggressive friend.
He’s a nice guy and usually quite honest, but he tends to pick fights that he doesn’t always finish. For years, he has been goading a group of guys that you see at the gym. There have been a few scuffles where you kept your distance, but you worry that soon something big will kick off. One day you walk outside the gym, and the guys are there gearing up for a fight. While you try to calm them down, your friend who started the fight runs away. You get beaten to a pulp and end up in hospital. Do you remain friends with the guy? Probably not.
This is effectively Europe’s position vis-à-vis America when it comes to sanctions against Russia.
The present conflict between Russia and Ukraine began, in a limited way, back in 2014. European leaders initially said they wanted nothing to do with it. They were content with their economic ties to Russia, and did not want a major flashpoint so close to their borders. Europe had taken much heavier and sustained losses than the United States in the Second World War, so they were much more inclined toward peace.
When the war kicked off in February of this year, Europe signed up to the fight. In public, European leaders have been gung-ho in offering their support to Ukraine. But if you read between the lines, you can see they’re unsure if taking part is a good idea. European leaders convinced themselves that they could limit their involvement to a few piecemeal sanctions and some weapons systems. On this reading, it would cost European countries a pretty penny, but it wouldn’t break the bank.
In recent weeks, as Russia has begun starving Europe of natural gas in the run-up to winter, it has become clear that Europe’s support for Ukraine will break the bank – assuming Goldman Sachs and others are wrong about gas prices falling, as I argue in UnHerd. In fact, it will not just break the bank; it will also break the factory and the bakery and most other facets of the economy. European leaders worry – sometimes publicly – about civil unrest and deindustrialisation; that is, a complete demolition of European industry.
When the leaders of these European countries turn around to see what America is doing, they see it sitting pretty. America has plenty of energy. True, the war is putting upward pressure on prices, and this has been hard for President Biden in the polls. But America is not facing a major economic crisis. The American response to the concerns of European leaders is pretty blasé too.
In their kinder moments, the Americans make promises to the Europeans (about Liquid Natural Gas, for example) that both sides know they cannot keep. In their unkinder moments, they laugh at the Europeans for running fanciful green energy schemes and allowing Russia – who most Western European leaders did not view as their adversary until recently – to gain control over their energy supplies.
Right now, Europe’s leaders are watching the Americans sneak away while they face a hefty beating. After this winter, many European countries will wake up cold, sore, and alone in a hospital bed. If their leaders pick up the phone and call the Americans, they will hear a voice on the other line suggesting they do it again next winter, assuming the war in Ukraine continues. Does anyone honestly believe that the alliance between Europe and America will survive this?
Not a chance. The alliance will break. Either the mainstream parties will gradually walk away from the sanctions and then, ever so slowly, renormalise relations with Russia. Or they’ll get forcibly ejected through a vote, and populist parties will tear up the sanctions and perhaps even pull out of NATO.
Are the Americans and the Europeans aware of this possibility? Whispers suggest they are.
Last week, The Washington Post reported that “White House officials are growing increasingly alarmed about Europe’s energy crisis”, which could “put new strains on a U.S.-Europe alliance that has proven surprisingly resilient since the start of the war”. Yet the fact that it has taken the Americans until now to realise this, when it should have been obvious immediately, means that we’re probably beyond the point of no return.
As I have written elsewhere: historians will look back on winter 2022-23 and ask why the Europe’s political leaders behaved so recklessly and the Americans encouraged them to do it, and wonder why. To which I can only suggest: war enthusiasm; absurd overconfidence; extremely poor economic analysis; political inertia, and a lack of proper leadership.
Philip Pilkington is a macroeconomist and investment professional. You can follow him on Twitter here and subscribe to his Substack newsletter here.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
But the anti-British Establishment will still be the USA’s willing poodle …. and will still pretend that the EU nations are “our friends and allies.”
There is no reason whatsoever for the UK to be suffering “an energy crisis.” We are sitting on hundreds of years’ worth of coal, oil, gas and shale gas. We only have a shortage of energy because of the moronic Net Zero policy and the obsession with expensive, unreliable, intermittent “renewables.”
The anti-British Establishment will be only too happy to transfer OUR energy to the continent via interconnectors and make the British people sit in the dark and cold …. so they can appease the EU.
Not quite.
The friend doesn’t end up in hospital. The friend’s abused family does.
Our so called leaders aren’t going to suffer anything. The populations they recklessly rule over will. People who had no say, no interest and no desire for fighting.
If our leaders suffered the consequences of their actions as we do, thongs would be very different.
“You can follow him on Twitter…. “ Which begs the question: how long?
If Europe pursues net zero to it’s logical conclusion the continent will be so poor the USA won’t bother to defend it. They don’t pick up clubs for Africans do they? EU is a defacto eastern province for the USA, and they spend cash on it’s defence because it’s profitable.
And it’s a useful base for certain operations, such as “RAF” Fairford. ISTR that it was used for the troubles in Kuwait, and of course for the Iraq war.
Perhaps one of the reasons Europe is in this sorry state and the idiots that call themselves the leaders of the member states and of the commission actually believed their moronic strategy would work, is by still using lines like “as Russia has begun starting Europe of natural gas”. Let us by no means forget that it is Europe itself that is starving the member states of natural gas with the absurd policy of pointing a gun at their own head and threatening Russia that they would pull the trigger if Russia did not do as it was told and go stand in the corner.
Stating this simple fact does not mean one is a Putin fan, a Russia apologist or is defending the invasion of Ukraine. To rectify a mistake one first needs to acknowledge it. It was the Europeans who told Putin they would stop taking gas from Russia, that for the time being they were willing to take delivery of said gas, but were not going to pay for it. He only gave them what they had stated categorically that they wanted.
They clearly imposed that sanction without even a second’s thought about the repercussions. No doubt this was in part because they figured it would be an excellent opportunity to wean Europeans off gas – even though they do not have and will not have for years a replacement. Bravo, what foresight, what forward thinking.
Deindustrialisation – the vast majority of modern-day politicians probably have no clue about what this means in terms of the economy, tax intake and indeed their own salaries and safety. For those that actually believe the BS they spout, it’s all about the ideals, not about the reality – no wonder they all worshipped Greta, they have a similar adolescent, unworldly attitude, except unlike her they have no excuse for their outlook other than a very sub-par intellect.
Excellent post Jane.
Bravo!
“…why Europe’s political leaders behaved so recklessly and the Americans encouraged them to do it…”
Because it was a very convenient distraction from “the pandemic”.
In short, most of the people in power are numpties who thrash around, fighting over pulling all the levers of an enormous machine they don’t in the slightest understand.
“To which I can only suggest: war enthusiasm; absurd overconfidence; extremely poor economic analysis; political inertia, and a lack of proper leadership.”
Not forgetting corruption and looting on an industrial scale using manufactured crises involving a trace gas plant food called CO2 and a lab-made but mostly non-threatening SARS virus.
I have a major problem with this type of analysis, it falls back on cock-up theory and I simply do not swallow this. There is no doubting the utter stupidity and incompetence of our political class – singular, because they all sing off the same hymn sheet – but the whole continent is in lockstep with perhaps Hungary as a lone voice of common sense. It doesn’t add up.
Events are being directed elsewhere, beyond national governments, and the aim is the collapse of the financial systems leading to UBI, social credit, digital ID of a poorly populace and enslavement.
Whether Putin is fighting with the Davos Deviants and the war is a distraction I’m not sure but the destruction of Europe is being undertaken wilfully and purposefully.
That it is a coordinated effort is unquestionable.
The speed at which coordinated action was taken suggests events are being directed, as you say. When national governments actually have a say, getting to the point of consensus and coordinated action takes time.
The open questions for me are who has the power to dictate to national governments and what is the motivation or ultimate goal.
But clearly anyone who thinks that Macron, or Boris Johnson or Pedro Sanchez or Mark Rutte did anything other than follow instructions is naive beyond redemption.
rem acu tetigisti!
‘…why the Europe’s political leaders behaved so recklessly and the Americans encouraged them to do it’ ?
Of course the problem is not any EU/USA alliance for there is no such thing. One of the aims of the EU is to set itself up as a competitor to the U.S., part of the reason why we left.
The Russo-German rapprochement, Franco-Russian cordiality, reflected, reflects that rationale.
Far greater minds than mine have set out the real problem:
‘Western states have made a range of commitments to Ukraine, starting with the Budapest memorandum, all the way through to President Joe Biden pledging ‘unwavering support’. There is a risk that, in trying to assert the difference between Article 5 and other pledges, Western capitals undermine the credibility of their commitments.’
‘The question in Eastern European capitals would be that if guarantees to Ukraine were negotiable, where does this leave Article 5? Divisions would emerge between the proponents of stability, such as France and Germany – eager for pragmatic diplomacy – and those in the Baltic, Balkans and the UK who fear Russian aggression. With NATO fixed by the imperative to assure its internal cohesion it would have little capacity to ‘compete’ (with Russia). This would therefore open the door to a more coercive approach (for Russia) in Georgia and Moldova, where the objective would be to ensure that these countries remain dependent on Russia and within a Russian sphere of influence. Explicit or implicit assurances to consult Russia on European security frameworks, meanwhile, would demonstrate to Beijing that Moscow is an invaluable ally in preventing AUKUS and other alliances and/or regional security arrangements from being focused solely on the Indo-Pacific.’
RUSI Feb 22
That would be why.
Meanwhile, in Moscow, the perspective, after the 16 Sept attacks on Kherson and Luhansk, is, as you might expect, completely different.
So a far better question could be ‘….why Russia’s political leader behaved so recklessly and the Chinese encouraged him to do it?’
‘Terrible day. The Kyiv regime carried out three terrorist attacks simultaneously aimed at the destruction of persons collaborating with Russia. A strike was dealt at the Kherson administration, the prosecutor general of the LPR was blown up, and the deputy head of the Berdyansk State Administration was shot dead, in fact, the latter [was killed] along with his wife, who was responsible for holding a referendum in the city. This is not counting the strike on the city of Valuiki in the Belgorod region….’
‘Kotenok’, Russian Military Reporter
‘How should we evaluate the signal from the Ukrainian side about several simultaneous terrorist attacks and two demonstrative shellings (Valuiki and Kherson administration)?
It means they have something to answer to the destruction of their infrastructure. They are able to turn the confrontation into a regime of full-scale terror, both in non-de-occupied territories and in Russia.
They have already carried out the necessary mobilisation of society for this.
We didn’t even start it.
The colossal and ramified “peacetime army” in Russia still has a feeling that everything will resolve itself.
It will not.
On the chevron, Zelensky has the inscription “Ukraine or death.” A huge part of our political elite (minus Medvedev, Kadyrov, and a few people) has the inscription on the chevron ‘Let’s make peace and let’s go back, the main thing is to shut up the toxic patriots and keep the hawks from managing the processes.’
And in general, they are succeeding.’
Zakhar Prilepyn, Russian Politician
‘The main question for the West was this: is this bear really predatory, smart and fast, or is it a plush toy?
So far they’ve made sure we’re Winnie the Pooh.’
‘Zhyvov’, Russian Military Volunteer
Yawn.
This sanction-regime is and remains idiotic. In the USA, that’s mostly Biding doing playacting determination for domestic policy reasons. In Europe, it’s not really more than playacting but additionally really harmful. Sanctions against Russia have been in place since 2014. They didn’t accomplish anything so far. They won’t accomplish anything in future. Lastly, they’re morally highly dubious as they’re intended to harm Russian non-combatants.
Agreed….It’s not only idiotic, it’s immoral…Sanctions have very little function other than showing that America is the biggest bully in the world. I find it shameful that any country that pretends to be democratic would continue with them, when it’s becoming apparent they are causing harm to ordinary people.
Both Human Rights Watch and the UN have repeatedly condemned the USA’s sanctions on Iran, which have caused immense suffering to the ordinary people of that country..to the extent that hospitals are even starved of medication…..
it’s utterly immoral, and also illegal..but its the USA…they do what they want…they do after all run the entire world…don’t they?…and they certainly call the shots in NATO.
They are not only funding promoting and continuing the war in Ukraine, which is bad enough, but that doesn’t seem to be enough for them and they continue to provoke China in relation to Taiwan…..The senate Foreign Relations Committee approved a bill on Wednesday that would radically alter US policy towards Taiwan and significantly escalate tensions with Beijing..….they are absolute psychopaths in my opinion…
Europe seems to be moving towards total economic and societal collapse..mainly because they are submitting to the whims of the USA….but we are supposed to be OK with this because….Ukraine. Well I’m not, and millions of others aren’t either. I have no fear whatsoever of Russia (or China for that matter) ‘taking over’ any parts of Europe, it’s a fairy story, perpetrated to manipulate the sleeping masses, so that the USA can continue its proxy war and its stated goal of ‘weakening Russia’…not saving Europe, Ukraine, or Ukrainian lives you may note!
To be fair: This kind of cold warfare against the civil population of a hostile country is a British innovation dating back to WWI, when the British navy declared a total blockade against the central powers with the intent to break their ability to continue the war. After three years, this lead to serious problems in Germany and Hungary which both about managed to grow and otherwise produce enough food to feed their people. This means that while there was widespread malnutrition, only fairly few and mostly very young or very old people actually starved to death (althrough this certainly contributed to many deaths).
The situation was considerably worse in Austria as the Hungarians didn’t feel like supporting the other parts of Austria-Hungary when they had to be frugal themselves. In the Ottoman empire, where the state was much less well organized than in Europe and the ruling classes cared very little about problems of the general population, both civilians and soldiers starved in droves. The following horror story was written down by a German doctor who was part of the staff of operation Jildirim, a German effort to support the Turks fighting against the British in Palestine, in 1917:
The authorities generally weren’t able to stop cannbalism anymore except in exemplary cases. In Mosul, the owner of a food stall was publically hanged together with his daughter after it became known that he had sold food made with the flesh of starved orphans whose corpses both had collected around the city.
That’s how the soft underbelly of the fight for peace and the freedom of the peoples really looked like. Mosul was later liberated by British troups (belongs to Iraq nowadays) but – for some strange reason – photos of the heaps of corpses of civlians who starved to death were never widely published.
Will the heavy price European countries are paying for sanctioning Russia break the Western alliance?
Simple answer, yes….whether because someone has the guts to say no the the stupidity and starts a breakaway, or because it will become a moot point when the whole economy of Europe collapses….take your bloody pick…..
Does that mean Ukraine wins?
Excellent read. Reminds me of a quote from an Arab gentleman I read long ago on the difficulty of deciding which colonial power to throw your lot in with. “ It is better to be an enemy of the British than their friend; if you are their friend they will sell you, but if you are their enemy they will try to buy you”
We have third/fourth-rate politicians and, as you get the government you deserve, they simply reflect the deficiencies in the UK population.
Why have Britain’s leaders been so incompetent?
‘The UK’s stores hold enough gas to meet the demand of four to five winter days, or just 1% of Europe’s total available storage. The Netherlands has capacity more than nine times the UK’s, while Germany’s is 16 times the size. Britain’s continental neighbours also have lower gas market prices.’
Jillian Ambrose Sept 2021
‘…..because of a decision taken in 2017 to close Centrica’s Rough storage facility, in the North Sea, which provided 70 per cent of the UK’s gas storage capacity for more than 30 years. It was shuttered after the Government refused to subsidise costly repairs.
At the time, cheap gas prices and plentiful supply meant there was little incentive for other firms to step in and fill the gap….’
Madeleine Cuff Feb 22
Since closing Rough in 2017, the UK has operated a just-in-time approach to gas procurement.
Brilliant! What could possibly have gone wrong. After all, no-one could predict that a ground war would break out in Europe…oh….hang on….
Russia invades Chechnya 2000, Georgia 2008, Ukraine 2014, Ukraine 2022