Understanding the War in Ukraine (17) - The Transatlantic Relationship with Erik Jones
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 24 июл 2024
- Prof Alexander Stubb in a conversation with Prof Erik Jones about the Transtlantic Relationship, meaning the relationship between Europe and the United States of America.
Erik Jones is Director of the Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies at the European University Institute.
He is also Professor of European Studies and International Political Economy at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS) - on extended leave. Professor Jones is author of The Politics of Economic and Monetary Union (2002), Economic Adjustment and Political Transformation in Small States (2008), Weary Policeman: American Power in an Age of Austerity (2012, with Dana H. Allin), and The Year the European Crisis Ended (2014). He is editor or co-editor of books and special issues of journals on topics related to European politics and political economy including The Oxford Handbook of the European Union (2012) and The Oxford Handbook of Italian Politics (2015). Professor Jones is co-editor of Government & Opposition and a contributing editor of Survival. His commentary has appeared in the Financial Times, the New York Times, and other major newspapers and magazines across Europe and North America.
This video is the fifth in a series of interviews delving into specific aspects of the war with professors at the European University Institute, following the 12 video lectures by STG Director Prof Alexander Stubb.
More via bit.ly/3lNanrs
#Ukraine #UkraineRussiaWar #UkraineWar #AlexanderStubb #ErikJones #Transatlantic #USA #America #Europe #EU 
Развлечения
Bravo! A conversation between two knowledgeable men. Interesting.
Speaking of the trans-Atlantic partnership, Canada went from endless debates about whether, when, and how to replace their aging CF-18 fighters, to agreeing to buy 88 new F-35A fighters. And now they’re agreeing to a massive upgrade to NORAD, which will be key in protecting NATO’s Arctic flank. And they have sent more arms to Ukraine (where they had already been a big player in retraining and Westernizing the Ukrainian military) and more troops to the Balkans. So add Canada to the list of countries that are even more committed to trans-Atlantic security now, after the Ukraine invasion.
Thank you so much, Professor Stubb!
Thank you for spending the time to create and share perspectives on an evolving matter 💙🙏🏾
Thank you for the informative videos. Covering the subject in-depth over many videos from many angles has made me much better informed. Again, my thanks, Mr. Prime Minister.
I would like to see NATO become the North Atlantic/pacific treaty org. And include Japan, so korea, Australia and New Zealand.
Such a revealing and clear statement of the present situation,thanks for this. As a regular member of the public, I think I see the threads of international interests but you pull all the threads together to show how those threads weave together, this is of great value. I live in Canada, Canadians get to study what is going on on America in great detail. I like my neighbours,in the past we have always shared similar values, we have always supported each other. How ever, Mr Trump was not only a wake up call for the Europeans. Since his presidency, there are currents within American political life , that scare Canadians. I have no right to speak for Canadians but many of us feel some kind of revolution is possible within America, perhaps they never finished the first one? NATO do have to build a more equal partnership within the organization. Naturally everyone hopes America will remain united within its’ self. It should also be clear to every N. American, that our great land mass is not the protection it once was. We do have to nurture strong allies some times to our own cost. Having strong allies is our only insurance policy and good effective insurance policies cost a lot. This is the what politicians have to make all citizens understand.
I don't live in Canada, but I've noted some Trump like thinking to the East in Canada. There are protests planned for Canada day. There was the truckers thing about Covid. However, it's in bad taste to make many disparaging references to Canada. They generally set the moral compass for North America.
"currents within American political life that scare Canadians" --- I think Paul Krugman was correct in 2018 that tRUMP "is a symptom, not the underlying problem. There wouldn't be a cult if the GOP weren't very sick to begin with."
In other words, the graffiti was on the wall long before the worst UNpresident won the presidency without winning the popular vote.
As a German I have absolutely no doubt that the American democracy will always bounce back. For ever Trump there is a Biden, on Bush follows Obama. It’s the enlightened Americans who are our allies, not the crazies. We not only need strong partners for insurance policy in case of a war. Our economies are connected in a way that they work as one. Canada and Taiwan are as indispensable as Sweden and Finnland or Bavaria and Saxonia. It’s all connected. We’re not only stronger together, we couldn’t even maintain our current strength, if we go apart. The day Russia cut ties with Europe made it a very sad and lonely country, on the way to become essentially a bigger North Korea.
@@jansix4287 Your faith in the USA is touching. Yes, there are many/mostly decent Americans. However, we Canadians have watched in alarm as US politics has become increasingly dysfunctional. The corporate-owned RepuGNicans (no longer decent Republicans) who deserve few votes are undermining the system (gerrymandering, voter suppression, etc) to ensure that they remain in undeserved power.
@@compassroses I’m sure the trucker convoy taught you that even Canadians are not immune against right-wing conspiracy theories. We’re battling them idiots in every country. As long as American comedians are going against them, the fight for truth is not lost.
Thank you.
Loved the video. I just read news that Turkey has dropped it's objections so Finland and Sweeden can proceed into NATO. I think a united democratic Europe is needed for world peace.
A United democratic Europe with strong ties to USA is essential to keeping the peace all over the globe (since we are the strongest economic engine at this time and an advantageous trade partner). And thus help economic prosperity as well.
Western peace
When winter hits Europe we will see how good the idea of "Sanctions on Russia" really was..
Important info. Thanks.
Ah yeah the 17 episode mini series XD
This series is almost longer then Firefly at this point
You gotta milk the cow while the iron is hot
Don’t worry the war will be over by Christmas. 🎅🎄🇺🇦
As a big fan of mixed metaphors, I must award you good sir.
@@jansix4287 it wasn't
@@matter7864 Nah, it’s all over for Russia, whether they admit defeat or not.
When will be episode "understanding the war in Ukraine - Ukraine"?
Why has the Nuland/Pyatt phone conversation been forgotten when discussing the TransAtlantic partnership. In that conversation about the Ukraine and EuroMaidan in 2014 Nuland who was asst. secretary of state spoke about regime change in the Ukraine. She asked the US ambassador to the Ukraine to involve himself in regime change in the Ukraine and he was successful in doing so. And in that conversation she said F the EU because she went behind their backs in orchestrating regime change. The phone conversation can be listened to on RUclips. If the Russians win this war, this conversation between Alex and his guest is null and void.
Why does that matter? Was the US supposed to go herd German cats and then make a decision? The whole thing would have been over before the EU could have a meeting to have a meeting about making a decision.
Got in early on this one. Cool.
Bil gates? Secretary of Defense
Edit: Do they mean Robert Gates
They meant Robert Gates.
Close enough for social media.
It would be interesting to include possible incompatibility between the personal interests of influential people in the EU/US and the interests of the nations in the EU. For example, in the context of a possible change in the EU’s relationship with China.
9:52 - 11:40
If our strengths attention is directed towards European security, than we need Europe’s strengths to direct an adequate amount of attention towards our weak/blind-spots. If we have a blind spot in i.e. our democracy we need our allies such as EU(I.e. Finland/etc who are perhaps stronger than us in certain democratic aspects ) to provide a portion of attention towards our blind spots while we are simultaneously directing our attention towards EU’s/etc blind spots. If we are stronger in certain regards, than we’ll direct energy towards Europe when needed but the same has to be said if EU (i.e. Finland/etc) is stronger than us in certain regards, than we’ll need EU to direct energy towards America when they see significant blind spots that may be occurring in the States. Whether it’s sounding the alarm and or direct assistance/insight/etc. EU/etc watches our back with their strengths and we watch their backs with our strengths. We all have strengths and weaknesses. Different roles to play at different times, etc … in a team sometimes there are scenarios where we will be the quarterback, and Europe will be the receiver, but sometimes it’ll be vice versa… in a team nations are playing different complementary roles/positions simultaneously.. from linebackers(middle, outside,etc), defensive ends, cornerbacks, defensive/offensive linemen, centers, safety’s, defensive backs, tightened, receivers, head coaches, offensive/defensive coordinators and coaches, owners, etc … in any given competition/game/play we’re not all simultaneously playing the same position because it does us no good to have 11 quarterbacks on the field while we’re on offense if we have no receivers/tightends/etc to throw to and or blockers to block until the receivers can get open, and or someone to draw up a particular play during the competition/game/etc… our strategies/plays/logistics/positions/roles are dynamically fluid AND every position is as valuable as the next because it takes a team to compete effectively/efficiently/etc against any other team. And we have the best team in the world so long as we are all willing to play our positions/roles when needed during a particular game/competition/individual-play/etc.. and each specific competition/game we are not necessarily playing the same positions. It’s game specific depending on the strengths and weaknesses each nation has in a particular style of matchup/competition/game. Each role/position is equally as important as the next. To play as a team and not individuals, is our greatest strength in this immediate galaxy that no one/group can come close to matching when we do play as a team. There’s no competition in the immediate galaxy
It's Robert (Bob) Gates, not Bill! :) But it's a lovely discussion. I always enjoy these videos.
Yeah, that was hilarious. No big deal though.
You probably noticed people tuning out when you started doing the interviews. That's because people liked this series because of you. When you shifted the focus, the interest shifted as well.
IDK, I've been learning a lot more about the "Russian Soul" from the phone conversations the Orcs make with their friends and lovers between Ukraine and Russia and it's not aligned with anything much but poverty and ignorance. Now I think I know them better, and how shallow that any Russian beliefs are lain.
I learned a new word today. Finlandisation! 😀
NATO on Russia´s border is making previous NATO members much less safe- because probability of a serious nuclear conflict is much higher than if there was a buffer zone!!! Czech Republic for instance should make hard effort to stop NATO enlargement since USA can not defend itself against Russia´s strategic nuclear forces, let alone to defend Czech Republic. This NATO enlargement is dangerous for all of us!! USA should leave NATO!!!
Saved my morning ❤️
Thank Thanks again and I am looking for work in a couple in North London to join us in in September September for
Europe will never be able to carry out large scale expeditionary operations as each country is too small. You need very big ticket items to do this such as aircraft carriers, amphibious assault ships, large military transport plans, re-fuelling aircraft and overseas bases. France and the UK have 3 aircraft carriers and the Spanish have a very small one. France and Italy are building 2 more and even with these they have less than 200 aircraft which is equivalent to 2 US aircraft carriers. I just cannot see Europe ever being capable of doing this.
What the Ukraine war has shown is that NATO needs armoured combat brigades and that Europe needs a lot more artillery and ammunition stocks together with the military industrial base to support those forces. Europe need to concentrate on this rather that looking at expeditionary operations outside Europe.
Agreed - a full defensive force & maybe a specialised peace keeping force to assist in cases of external conflicts between other nations.
ie. build on what we have already - the EU does not seek to expand into other continents.
screw that BS at least half the of voters want nothing to do with this and never did and i for one resent people like you acting as if you get to drag the rest of us in to your stupidity.
it is a free world vs orwellian world
Great questions… and interesting and informative answers. Resource depletion, and dwindling populations of western democracies… could trigger a massive immigration and cultural shift on both Europe and America. (From overpopulated and poverty countries). That’s certainly happening in the US. The US private sector middle class is disappearing… so it will be a much poorer country… unable to fund wars abroad. I see a pulling apart of the western alliance… but I hope I’m wrong. Great discussion between two well educated and thoughtful professors.
That is not new, and the scare tactics used by grifters and political opportunists to grab power and riches are a cynical but effective ploy. Americans are all immigrants and descendants of immigrants, even the first nations of today replaced others that had come earlier, thousands of years earlier. The Europeans of today are a mix of latecomers with earlier arrivals, and the same is true of most places. Fear of newcomers is sometimes justified [such as Ukrainians fearing the Neo-Mongol Russians], but is usually misplaced. Boston, for example is a much better place now than it was when run by fanatical, totalitarian Puritans, for example.
The unacknowledged reality is that the US is a European country in all but geographic propinquity [though this ignores Greenland and Iceland]. There are more Americans of German descent here than in Germany, more Irish than in Ireland, etc. Our founders were steeped in English political theory [Locke, Hobbes, etc.] and the French Enlightenment [Rousseau, Montesquieu, etc.]. Yes we are a congeries of European colonies become independent and grown into a world power. The US, Canada and Europe are compatible because we have a common history and heritage. The French sometimes proclaimed after 9/11, "Maintenant, nous sommes américains!" This echoes what American soldiers said in France during WW I and WW II, "Lafayette we have come/Lafayette, nous sommes arrivés! What could have been said by Pres. Biden in Poland more directly would have been, "We remember that Kościuszko and Pulaski came to help the US become free, we are here to help Poland remain free/Pamiętamy, że Kościuszko i Pułaski przybyli, aby pomóc USA stać się wolnymi, jesteśmy tutaj, aby pomóc Polsce pozostać wolnym!" The Atlantic Ocean may have divided us politically, but has tied us together economically, culturally and philosophically.
Saludos de Mexico, exactly! as a Latin American, I always say that the US is the least American Country in the Americas, in most of Lat Am of our DNA is indigenous, our food is indigenous, our native languages are still spoken, and many pre-Colombian cultural aspects still live on. Even Canada is more grounded in the Americas than the US.
@@j.obrien4990 We took and took and took from the indigenous people, giving them in return disease, poverty and marginalization on marginal lands.
@@JMM33RanMA In Latin America we're guilty of that too, but we also mixed with them, so we're one big happy mess of mestizos now.
@@j.obrien4990 nah Canada is more cultural tied to Europe than US. They have a more European liberal style of governance. Thier health system mirrors Europe's too. Not to mention, Canada is still considered a Commonwealth.
The U.S. too has strong Hispanic ties. Latin Americans already are the largest minority group, and is positioned to over take whites in coming decades. Latin American culture permeates all through US society. Through food, media, music, economics, politics, and much more. How many Hispanics hold political positions in Canada and Europe? How many of them know what arepas or quinoa is? I bet many gringos in the US does. Especially those that live in south/southwest. Intermarriage between Whites and Hispanics aren't showing any signs of slowing down either.
In fact, it might be fair to say the US is becoming more culturally tied to Latin America then it is to Europe now.
@@blackmatterlives9865 this shows how little you know about Canada and Latin America. There are parlimentary systems in LA, and most of us have universal health care (it may not be great by we have it :-). Canada is very multicultural and with huge migrant communities from LA. most of my friends from Colombia have migrated to Canada (Quebec), not the US, and for a Colombian we feel much more at home in Canada than in the US.
1:30 _"When the cold war ended"_
The Cold war never ended
Waste of time lisin to this guys.
I hope that throat clearing is temporary, my dad does it with every sentence and it gets on my last nerve.
Robert Gates was US Secretary of Defense 2006-2011, not Bill Gates. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Gates
They've referred to a "Bill Gates" a few times now. Are they actually referring to Robert (Bob) Gates, former SecDef under both Bush II and Obama?
15:51 - 16:03 💯🙏🏾🌎🌏🌍💙👍🏾
12:33 - 12:40 💯
12:33 - 12:51 - 12:55 - 13:02 💯💯💯
I'm still skeptical of the inevitable rise of China. It seems to me China has huge problems at home that have been exacerbated by covid lockdowns, supply chain breakdowns, the war, etc. The pivot by the US, it seems to me, would more likely be inward than to the East (except of course ties w/ Japan, S Korea, Oceania, etc.) as the world becomes more regional than global. I don't personally like the idea, but I think internationalism is on the wane and we will probably go back to an era of more regional self-reliance, both in terms of security and economy. Again, I'm not advocating this, it just seems that's the long term trend once we've gotten past this war.
Not to mention their demographic problems, the fact they have zero capable or wealthy allies (unless you count Russian oil), and the fact that they couldn't have a modern military without stealing tech from other countries. And don't get me started on their dodgy statistical reporting.
NATO on Russia´s border is making previous NATO members much less safe- because probability of a serious nuclear conflict is much higher than if there was a buffer zone!!! Czech Republic for instance should make hard effort to stop NATO enlargement since USA can not defend itself against Russia´s strategic nuclear forces, let alone to defend Czech Republic. This NATO enlargement is dangerous for all of us!! USA should leave NATO!!!
@@mirekslechta7161 Why is there a need for a buffer zone? Russia has invaded a sovereign neighbor and NATO has not entered the conflict. NATO exists along thousands of kilometers of the Russian border in the Baltic nations and there doesn't seem to be a problem there (now w/ Finland joining, there will be twice that). This idea that NATO is threat to Russia is a Russian concoction and we have to stop catering to Russia's desire to take away the freedoms of neighboring countries in order them to "feel safe."
The idea that Russia would employ strategic nukes borders on ridiculous. Even the use of a tactical nuke would gain them nothing: it would just unleash the military of NATO/EU/USA and then... game over for Russia.
Just imagine you live in Estonia. Would you wish to leave NATO after watching what the Russian army is capable of doing to civilians and civilian infrastructure? I don't think so. Unless you are pro-Russia... If so, there's no real point in continuing the discussion.
@@headoverheels88 Totally agree... And w/ Xi amassing more power and becoming more isolated, there's not a lot of hope for reforms that would actually benefit the people who live there. Looks like they're driving off a cliff to me and I find the "rise of China" talk to be a bit baffling. It seems to me they are in for a major contraction and that they are in total denial about it.
@@christophercousins184 Buffer zone? Please study a bit modern strategic guns... RUSSIA and USA has most of them. Russia keeps them at the same distance from Washington all the time(except of what is in submarines) . Those weapons would need to get to it´s targets inside USA about 45 minutes... USA have 30 minutes to respond. USA could bring similar, but smaller rockets from USA to Ukraine, Finland and so on ... than USA can hit Moscow or Russia´s strategic weapons inside Russia in 5 to 10 minutes... That is a big advantage for USA. If you do not agree, it does not matter at all as long as Russia sees it the same way as I do... Another advantage of buffer zone: lower likelihood of false warning and therefore lower likelihood of nuclear armagedon for anybody inside NATO. Even 10 year old children would understand to this logic....
It was Robert Gates, not Bill Gates who was secretary of defense.
This guy is sharp. People need to listen. He has a whole series of videos on the subject.
Russia could take Ukraine all the way to the Dneiper and they'd still have lost terribly. Sweden and Finland in NATO, Germany doubling its defense spending, NATO's fast reaction force going from 40K to 300K. Europe shaking off its dependence on Russian energy. In the meantime, the Russian army gets chewed to pieces in a Pyrrhic victory or a stalemate - and half the Black Sea fleet is sunk. Western long-range artillery is just starting to filter in. That's how they kicked the Russians off Snake island.
If you think sanctions are going to bring Russia to its knees, you're wrong. But if you think there's no impact, you're also wrong. The lack of advanced western chips has shut down the assembly lines for tanks and PGMs. The rouble is high in value thru central bank manipulations but nobody wants to take them. That's why they went into default. The Russians may sell $100 bn in oil to China and India but every penny is burnt up by the war instead of doing something useful in the Russian economy. The price of oil will drop and Russia will be screwed.
Another, much more in-depth series is by a guy called Perun.
ruclips.net/channel/UCC3ehuUksTyQ7bbjGntmx3Q
Poland at first said Russia did but USA no was en accident!
Welcome to NATO 🤝 🇫🇮
Professor Stubb I enjoyed your guest, Eric, tonight. And I appreciate all your video’s for the most part. But throughout your series about the Ukraine war. I don’t care for your oblique shadow boxing against America. What’s that all about? America has never invaded Finland. We gave Finland substantial financial assistance to help it’s recovery from the devastation of World War II. But has America caused harm to Finland? I don’t think so. So why the shadow play?
What?
NATO on Russia´s border is making previous NATO members much less safe- because probability of a serious nuclear conflict is much higher than if there was a buffer zone!!! Czech Republic for instance should make hard effort to stop NATO enlargement since USA can not defend itself against Russia´s strategic nuclear forces, let alone to defend Czech Republic. This NATO enlargement is dangerous for all of us!! USA should leave NATO!!!
Rewriting history l see, how’s the weather in fantasy land today guys.
BOB Gates!!! BOB, not Bill.
Russia is done for !
NATO on Russia´s border is making previous NATO members much less safe- because probability of a serious nuclear conflict is much higher than if there was a buffer zone!!! Czech Republic for instance should make hard effort to stop NATO enlargement since USA can not defend itself against Russia´s strategic nuclear forces, let alone to defend Czech Republic. This NATO enlargement is dangerous for all of us!! USA should leave NATO!!!
@@mirekslechta7161 No NATO is making Europe safe without NATO unity Russia would just attack and destroy one country at a time like Hitler did.
@@martinsFILMS13 Really? This is what you teach your children?
@@mirekslechta7161 its what reality teaches us
@@martinsFILMS13 Your "reality" is what vast majority of people on this planet would refuse as pro USA propaganda.
Unintended consequence ...if Europe and US cosy up too nicely China will settle with and court nationalist India and the balance of forces will shift again
Why would you blame the Europeans for Iraq?
The United States call it "Liberation" instead of "Invasion". That was what US call it in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Yemen, Somalia and the list goes on... Why the double standard? Confused... Please enlighten. Genuine question...
Instances of the United States "liberated" or overthrowing, or attempting to overthrow, a foreign government since the Second World War. (* indicates successful ouster of a government)
China 1949 to early 1960s
Albania 1949-53
East Germany 1950s
Iran 1953 *
Guatemala 1954 *
Costa Rica mid-1950s
Syria 1956-7
Egypt 1957
Indonesia 1957-8
British Guiana 1953-64 *
Iraq 1963 *
North Vietnam 1945-73
Cambodia 1955-70 *
Laos 1958 *, 1959 *, 1960 *
Ecuador 1960-63 *
Congo 1960 *
France 1965
Brazil 1962-64 *
Dominican Republic 1963 *
Cuba 1959 to present
Bolivia 1964 *
Indonesia 1965 *
Ghana 1966 *
Chile 1964-73 *
Greece 1967 *
Costa Rica 1970-71
Bolivia 1971 *
Australia 1973-75 *
Angola 1975, 1980s
Zaire 1975
Portugal 1974-76 *
Jamaica 1976-80 *
Seychelles 1979-81
Chad 1981-82 *
Grenada 1983 *
South Yemen 1982-84
Suriname 1982-84
Fiji 1987 *
Libya 1980s
Nicaragua 1981-90 *
Panama 1989 *
Bulgaria 1990 *
Albania 1991 *
Iraq 1991
Afghanistan 1980s *
Somalia 1993
Yugoslavia 1999-2000 *
Ecuador 2000 *
Afghanistan 2001 *
Venezuela 2002 *
Iraq 2003 *
Haiti 2004 *
Somalia 2007 to present
Honduras 2009 *
Libya 2011 *
Syria 2012
Ukraine 2014 *
2014 - 2022 - 6 countries yet to verify.
Pakistan 2022 *
Have you forgotten China 1989?
American taxpayers resent carrying the load of European security. Europeans need to step up far more on the financial cost of it's defense. We now owe $30T and can not continue to subsidize Euro defense as we have.
ROBERT Gates
10:25 He "doesn't want to blame the Europeans 100%" for the war in Iraq??? Huh?
Maybe Prof Stubb, you should bring on an american academic who is a bit more skeptical of american policies. This guy seems to be blindly defending american policies as if he's a paid pr firm.
Another Charles R. Schwab employee
I like Professor Stubb because he’s one of the only European academics I’ve seen who says what NATO is. It’s America defending Europe. Full stop.
My first joined Facebook word of God Elon always trick me show me money i say i Don't need money i'm god ukrine Russia war he Said help ukrine Fight Russia he know i'm Liverpool he Said i resccue Manchester United fight Liverpool my heart Said ok you want fight With me it's ok
Europe's view on its security is too rational for what the US wants.
- The main security threat is climate change, which the Americans barely acknowledge.
- The threat that bothers the US the most (China) is less of an issue for the regional powers in Europe, partially because only France has a direct stake in the Pacific, but largely because it really has very little it can do about China. France is the only European country with significant population and forces in the Pacific.
- Russia is a security threat, but mainly in its corruption of the political discourse, its support for cybercrime and its relentless global propaganda. Militarily, it has proven to be incapable of attack, and there is no point in seriously rearming NATO. Most of what needs to happen in better use of existing budgets, more standardisation, more training together and improved military mobility, all of which were already under way in PESCO.
- The Middle East is not a place where Europe as a whole can constructively engage.
I disagree with you on several points Dirk, maybe in nuance. Eloquently put btw.
- The US is very aware of the threat of climate change (especially the US military complex).
Sadly climate change became a political issue with large corporate protectionism & GOP systematically blocking every effort by the present government to take action in this regard (look at the administration's proposals).
Another aspect to consider for the US are the climate crises that the country is currently facing (namely the record drought in the West) which even the GOP will not be able to ignore.
- With the health crisis the EU became painfully aware of its dependence on Eastern manufacturing & suppliers.
Russia's invasion of Ukraine has shattered the EU's naive belief that trade alone can tame & build bridges between divergent ideologies, it also emphasised the risks of becoming overly dependent on any one source.
China's 'Wolfe diplomacy' has done China no favours in the EU countries.
Human rights & individual freedoms are the EU's founding principles that cannot be ignored.
- I tend to agree with you about the Middle East (& Africa) due to our collective colonial histories, other than to a certain extent we have a responsibility to engage & will suffer many consequences if we do not.
I think that today's announcements by NATO sums up western Europe's conclusions following Russia's insane invasion of Ukraine.
it is a free world vs orwellian world
@@JamesC785 Indeed, I largely agree. I would only say that China will now definitely remain a strategic partner for the EU, now that Russia went rogue.
And I'm not even sure that the US minds that. In the end, the main imperative for both Europe and the US is to make sure China and Russia do not become actual allies.
@@lacdirk Agreed.
I have a vague hope that China has noted the effect of a leader dodging term limits.
@@JamesC785 Agreed. Europeans just got a rude wake up call that soft power depends to some extent on hard power, and that soft power has limits when faced with those who just don't care about a rules-based system, violating it whenever expedient.
Putin would not have attacked Ukraine if there was a Trump administration. Former Putin advisor has said so. Additionally Putin didn’t during 4 years of Trump administration.
Bill Gates or Bill Clinton?
They mean Bob (Robert) Gates, Obama's Secretary of Defense.
EU should be instrumental towards demilitarization of America
with that, EU will have the moral authority to secure demineralization of Russia
with that in hand China India will have no reason to militarized themselves
give peace a chance
EU will bankrupt itself if the entire EU is to militarizes themselves individually
- trying to ignore Russian proximity is ‘geographically stupid’ and economically disastrous
Democracy has a price, but not to the extent of genocide on both sides
If US spends less on military, maybe more stuff can be done for climate change and changing the health care system.
I sincerely doubt that more moral authority and less weapons are the answer to the threat of Russia. You are assuming Russia and China will behave in a completely logical way. If that were the case this disastrous war wouldn't have happened, or would have stopped when the very intended assault to Kiev failed miserably, and China would not contemplate its zero covid strategy for the next five years. The west is at the negotiation table from day one, asking for peace, and that will continue. When Russia talks about peace, it means surrender, that's not an option. As you said, it is stupid for the EU to militarise itself individually. It will militarise itself as a collective.
Lol do you seriously believe the US would spend less on military because of the EU? The US just wants Europe to spend more so they can concentrate on the Indo-Pacific. The blob establishment running the foreign policy are permanent no matter what the government.
NATO on Russia´s border is making previous NATO members much less safe- because probability of a serious nuclear conflict is much higher than if there was a buffer zone!!! Czech Republic for instance should make hard effort to stop NATO enlargement since USA can not defend itself against Russia´s strategic nuclear forces, let alone to defend Czech Republic. This NATO enlargement is dangerous for all of us!! USA should leave NATO!!!
@@daniellarson3068 I would be very glad if USA would leave, otherwise soner or later USA would provoke Russia inside Finland or Ukraine so much, that Russia would nuke us all within two hours... including USA. I wish NATO(USA) would never step inside Finland....
How its going?? Ukraine is winning?😂😂😂
Trump 2024
NATO on Russia´s border is making previous NATO members much less safe- because probability of a serious nuclear conflict is much higher than if there was a buffer zone!!! Czech Republic for instance should make hard effort to stop NATO enlargement since USA can not defend itself against Russia´s strategic nuclear forces, let alone to defend Czech Republic. This NATO enlargement is dangerous for all of us!! USA should leave NATO!!!
damn... he never answered the question if Europe's response to 9/11 helped the US at all-
its my opinion that EU "help" in our war in Afghanistan was meaningless. and was ultimately just for show- every nation sent a tiny bit because they didn't wanna be known as that one European country that didn't help the US.. which to us Americans is like, why even show up at all if you are gonna half ass it??
And if we Americans half ass it on Russia, Europe will start talking about unreliable the US is as a "partner" but rarely do europeans ever ask if they are dependable to the US- and to a lot if not most americans see europe as dead weight considering the way the world is going..
8:08 Trump was in power for 4 years there was stability in the world.
Nobody was threatening nukes.
Kim tried and then they became beat friends and there were no more threats.
Today we hear talk about nukes on the daily.
Trump was a friend of dictators. He was a want to be dictator. What did he achieve in his summit with Kim jun un?
Yes because he was unstable/unpredictable/irresponsible. Now that he's gone Russia and others can threaten with nukes. There was "stability" trough instability.
@@SSDDssed Yeah everyone was scared of him enemies and allies of USA so nobody dared to do anything.
China couldnt sleep at night during those 4 years.
Putin got the message "we gonna nuke Moscow if you try anything in Ukraine, +200 dead Russians in Syria by USA strike"
Mike Pompeo described Trump correctly as " Trump is an imperfect instrument"
Trump was a force that needed to be directed and channeled correctly I think Pompeo did a really good job guiding the Trump energy towards the Geo political enemies.
Trump was great.
Except for all the nuclear threats Trump made himself.
_"North Korea best not make any more threats to the United States,"_ Trump said during a meeting on opioids from his golf club in New Jersey. _"They will be met with fire and fury like the world has never seen ... he has been very threatening beyond a normal state. They will be met with fire, fury and frankly power the likes of which this world has never seen before."_
God knows why Trump fans have no memory? 🤷
The United States call it "Liberation" instead of "Invasion". That was what US call it in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Yemen, Somalia and the list goes on... Why the double standard? Confused... Please enlighten. Genuine question...
Instances of the United States "liberated" or overthrowing, or attempting to overthrow, a foreign government since the Second World War. (* indicates successful ouster of a government)
China 1949 to early 1960s
Albania 1949-53
East Germany 1950s
Iran 1953 *
Guatemala 1954 *
Costa Rica mid-1950s
Syria 1956-7
Egypt 1957
Indonesia 1957-8
British Guiana 1953-64 *
Iraq 1963 *
North Vietnam 1945-73
Cambodia 1955-70 *
Laos 1958 *, 1959 *, 1960 *
Ecuador 1960-63 *
Congo 1960 *
France 1965
Brazil 1962-64 *
Dominican Republic 1963 *
Cuba 1959 to present
Bolivia 1964 *
Indonesia 1965 *
Ghana 1966 *
Chile 1964-73 *
Greece 1967 *
Costa Rica 1970-71
Bolivia 1971 *
Australia 1973-75 *
Angola 1975, 1980s
Zaire 1975
Portugal 1974-76 *
Jamaica 1976-80 *
Seychelles 1979-81
Chad 1981-82 *
Grenada 1983 *
South Yemen 1982-84
Suriname 1982-84
Fiji 1987 *
Libya 1980s
Nicaragua 1981-90 *
Panama 1989 *
Bulgaria 1990 *
Albania 1991 *
Iraq 1991
Afghanistan 1980s *
Somalia 1993
Yugoslavia 1999-2000 *
Ecuador 2000 *
Afghanistan 2001 *
Venezuela 2002 *
Iraq 2003 *
Haiti 2004 *
Somalia 2007 to present
Honduras 2009 *
Libya 2011 *
Syria 2012
Ukraine 2014 *
Pakistan 2022 *
I'm a white South African, first eligible to vote in 1994 (Nelson Mandela became president) I was old enough to be aware of political rhetoric, but too naive to understand the extent of Apartheid I grew up with. Just as Putin controls state media, the Afrikaner National Party controlled EVERYTHING. Racism for me was English vs Afrikaners (NOT black vs white). I only learned the black vs white thing when I travelled internationally (you have to be out of the forest to see trees). Sanctions were just "normal": I think Israel was our biggest trade partner since both countries developed and traded military stuff for our respective perennial wars (SADF was fighting Russian backed slaughter regimes in Angola, Mozambique and SWA (Namibia). So my point... President FW de Klerk went against EVERYTHING his Party had regimented since Verwoed's apartheid policy in late 1950's. He pushed for Mandela's release and first multiracial election. He did so because US, British, European powers had diplomatically reiterated for SO many years that South Africa's Apartheid policy was unacceptable on the global stage. The west pushed (sanctioned 😉via sanctions) for a regime change because it was WRONG. If US uses their trade block or military or CIA money bandits to encourage enlightened governance in a country, is that not good? Do South Koreans not enjoy a better standard of living for it now? Is East Germany, Latvia, Estonia etc not better for being able to plot their independence from Soviet doctrine that came about via Afghan conflict? Western foreign policy achieved a good thing in South Africa 1994. I suggest Russian policy in South Africa at present (Zuma, Ramaposas cash couches, UN voting habit) is holding 50 million souls in abject poverty which is a bad thing. South Africans are finally readying to install an enlightened government (Corrupt ANC ruling party is imploding) by 2024. It takes time, but eventually a nation gains a level of maturity to oust autocratic dictators, topple criminal heads of state and revolt against bad leadership. True liberation can ONLY be achieved if citizens are prepared to take up the mantle made available by external influence?
And you believe everything you hear? And all of those that actually happened are from over 20 years ago.
It's funny how only US/the west are liars but everyone else is honest😂
The death of ukranian grandmas and babies doesn't hurt the US, it doesn't help the countries the US invaded either. Therefore, the war in Ukraine is monstrous and Russia has to stop. I repeat: to believe that this hurts the US is delusional, the west sees this as an opportunity to pressure Russia and maybe neutralise its hability to wage war for decades. The west is using its weapons to slowly kill russians without losing lives themselves. If you value Russia (I don't know if that's the case), you'll want this to stop.