Is it madness or stupidity? Or are the two indistinguishable in Europe?
The war party takes Munich
This year’s Munich Security Conference was not merely disappointing; it was pointless. It produced no new ideas and no added value. Instead, it resembled a rally of a self-styled “coalition of the willing” for war. That, unfortunately, is consistent with Germany’s long tradition of failing to draw the right lessons from history.
Western European leaders spoke almost exclusively about rearmament and the creation of an independent military capability aimed, openly or implicitly, at confrontation with Russia. The tone was unmistakable: preparation for war, not peace. At the same time, participants repeated the familiar mantra that “more must be done” to ensure Ukraine’s victory. The contradiction went largely unnoticed. What emerged instead was a disturbing impression that Western Europe’s war party has overwhelmed everything else, including common sense and the instinct for self-preservation.
There was something unsettlingly familiar about the atmosphere. One could not help recalling Germany in the spring of 1945, when defeat was inevitable yet resistance continued with fanatical intensity, sustained by fantasies of miracle weapons. In Munich itself, Bavarian Gauleiter Paul Giesler crushed an attempted surrender on April 28, 1945 by executing Wehrmacht officers and civilians who wanted to hand the city over to the Americans without a fight. Hitler rewarded this “loyalty” by appointing Giesler interior minister the day before his own suicide. Within days, Giesler shot his wife and then himself. History rarely repeats itself neatly, but it often rhymes, and Munich echoed loudly this year.
On stage, European figures such as Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen, alongside American voices like Senator Roger Wicker, openly called for supplying Ukraine with ever more advanced weapons, including Tomahawk missiles, described with an alarming casualness as if it were a modern “wunderwaffe.” The old refrain was repeated yet again: Ukraine can win, but Russia is also poised to attack NATO. This logical contradiction has become a permanent feature of Western discourse.
Washington, for its part, played along. But cautiously. This time, it sent the 'good cop': Secretary of State Marco Rubio, in contrast to last year’s 'bad cop', J.D. Vance. Gone were the blunt warnings about Western Europe’s inevitable collapse if it stayed the course. Instead came soothing assurances of American support and solidarity. Yet the underlying message remained unchanged: without the United States, the EU cannot survive. The transatlantic alliance was not restored; it was merely cosmetically repaired.
Zelensky received the expected applause from Munich’s hawkish audience and once again demanded security guarantees from Washington. In plain terms, he was asking the United States to commit itself to direct war with Russia.
Germany, meanwhile, declared its readiness to rearm and assume leadership of the Western slice of Europe in a new confrontation with Moscow. At the same time, Emmanuel Macron cautiously signalled that the bloc must eventually negotiate with Russia. Albeit, if only to avoid being excluded altogether while talks proceed in a Russia-Ukraine-US format. He even floated extending the French and British nuclear umbrella to other NATO members. In other words, “all quiet on the Western Front.”
Once again, the conclusion is unavoidable: there is little to be gained from dialogue with this EU. And furthermore, one is reminded why it was precisely “civilized” and “enlightened” Europe that became the cradle of the two most devastating wars in human history.
Equally telling were the subjects that never surfaced. Talk of corruption in Ukraine, or of where Western funds are going, or when accountability will begin, was absent. So too was the fate of Venezuela’s leadership and the precedent set for international law. Iran was barely mentioned, despite last year’s US-Israeli military actions and the obvious risks of escalation. Even Greenland appeared only in whispered conversations offstage. Why complicate matters, when invoking the Russian threat remains the safest and most reliable option?
That, in essence, is all one needs to know about this year’s Munich Conference. A forum with a promising youth and a respectable maturity, now drifting toward ideological exhaustion.
War industry oligarchs are running the world with the sole purpose of keeping the war industry inventories moving. Why should Rubio be baffled?
Rubio baffled by Western war cheerleaders
The Ukraine conflict is “one of the few wars” that some in the international community have been cheering and condemning efforts to bring to an end, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has said.
The top US diplomat made the remarks on Monday during a joint press conference with Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban in Budapest.
Rubio claimed that the US was the only country that has managed to bring Russia and Ukraine together for negotiations, yet lamented the reaction of certain actors in the international community to the mediating effort of the Trump administration.
“Usually when you’re trying to end wars, the international community applauds you. This is one of the few wars I’ve ever seen where some people in the international community condemn you for trying to help end the war, but that’s what we’re trying to do,” he said without explicitly naming any pro-war actors.
This year, Russia, Ukraine, and the US held two rounds of trilateral talks in Abu Dhabi, and multiple discussions between the parties in different formats have also taken place. Negotiations are set to take place “again in Geneva later this week,” Rubio stated. The top diplomat claimed that Washington has not been trying to “impose a deal on anybody” but rather “help” both parties to end the “incredibly damaging” conflict.
The two recent rounds of talks were held behind closed doors, with no details shared by either side other than both Moscow and Washington calling the talks “productive” and “constructive.” The latest meeting has yielded an exchange of 314 POWs between Russia and Ukraine. Multiple public statements from senior officials from all the sides, however, have indicated that the positions of the two sides remain far apart on territorial issues.
Moscow has maintained that any sustainable settlement requires Ukraine to withdraw from the areas still under its control in Donbass, which voted to join Russia in 2022. Kiev, however, has repeatedly rejected making any territorial concessions.
=============================================================================================
No comments:
Post a Comment