SearchRecent comments
Democracy LinksMember's Off-site Blogs |
caged egg-heads, stinkers and brain-dead european leaders.....Witnessing the extraordinary cage fight this week between Volodomyr Zelenskyy and Donald Trump in the Oval Office provided an eye-popping glimpse into what is normally kept behind closed doors when world leaders meet to nut out matters of great consequence. Ukraine deal: Beware of Americans bearing gifts By Eugene Doyle
The two presidents loudly talked over each other, eyeballs rolling, aggressively gesticulating and contradicting each other, with occasional interjections by Vice-President JD Vance – “I think it’s disrespectful for you to come into the Oval Office and try to litigate this in front of the American media!” Shortly after the on-camera shouting match, Trump said the deal was off and posted: “He disrespected the United States of America in its cherished Oval Office. He can come back when he is ready for Peace.” On one hand it was a public airing of a mafia-style shakedown to force Ukraine to hurriedly sign an Unequal Treaty – effectively, for Ukraine to cede sovereignty and control over key parts of its economy to the US. But Zelenskyy foolishly picked a fight with someone he desperately needs in his corner and the odds of the US now going to the mat for Ukraine just go a lot less likely. Zelenskyy had dangled the minerals in front of Trump weeks ago as bait to try to lure the US into providing a security guarantee. The US position is, however, that the war is unwinnable and must be ended – so Trump wants to take the bait (the minerals) but not the hook (a security guarantee). Former US Treasury secretary Larry Summers likened the deal for their “ally” Ukraine to the Versailles Treaty imposed on Germany after World War I – when British PM Lloyd George said, “We shall squeeze Germany until the pips squeak!” Current Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent had a kinder spin: he said in the FT that the deal was focused on “turbocharging the country’s economic growth”. There is some merit in that. Reconstruction aid will obviously be enormously important; how it is negotiated, however, is also critical. Boris Johnson lauded Ukraine last week for “the continuing heroism of the Ukrainian people in resisting a vile act of unprovoked aggression”. I’ll have to go back and check if he was referring to Russia or the United States. Bo-Jo called the minerals deal “the great prize”, a holy grail that Ukraine should be thrilled about. However, the former Clown King of England did let slip that the deal was akin to the WWII US Lend-Lease “assistance” to Britain: “Yes, it’s extortionate, looked at one way, but so was Lend-Lease in 1941, wasn’t it? Americans. Absolutely stiffed us. Stiffed us,” Johnson said with jollity. Homer (the Greek, not the Simpson) would have had a field day over all of this. He would have loved the metamorphosis of the Americans turning from godlike protectors into robber barons. In a neat twist, Trump, as a modern day Agamemnon, turns a gift (billions of dollars of Ukraine aid) into a Trojan Horse. Welcome to what is being described as the end of the post-war world. The core gambit by the US is to retroactively reclassify “aid” as “debt”, granting the US the rights to a substantial portion of Ukraine’s mineral wealth as “reparations” for what was previously “aid”. It sets a disturbing precedent in international relations. The Kyiv Independent published the full text of the proposed deal on 26 February. Section 3 says 50% of future mineral revenues must be paid into the proposed Reconstruction Investment Fund. The US would have governance of the Fund – which would decide on distributions to shareholders and be subject to US law. What we seem to be back to is the kind of unequal treaties the French imposed on Niger for uranium, Mali for gold, Guinea for diamonds (human beings too if we go a little further back), and by Britain, the Ottomans and every other empire. None of this would have surprised Thucydides: “The strong do what they can; the weak suffer what they must.” The White House said in 2022: “The United States is proud to be the largest single donor of humanitarian, democracy, and human rights assistance to Ukraine.” It is worth pointing out that donor suggests “no strings attached”. President Biden also said: “We are united in our abhorrence of Putin’s depraved onslaught, and we’re going to continue to have their back as they fight for their freedom, their democracy, their very survival.” As well as having Ukraine’s back, the US is now saying they will also have their minerals. The Trump administration has got it right on one fundamental point: the war must end, there must be a return to diplomacy, culminating in a new security architecture for the whole of Europe. Out on the driveway of the White House, following his rumble with Zelenskyy, Trump said: “He wants to go on and fight, fight, fight. We’re looking for peace. We’re not looking for someone who is going to sign up a strong power and then not make peace because they feel emboldened.” I think that is a valid point. I don’t, however, think Ukraine should be muscled into signing a hasty deal on resources. It would be wrong that the Ukrainians, having sacrificed the sweet red wine of their youth, now have to smelt their own steel to turn into the chains of their own servitude to the American Empire. What valuable lesson might we all possibly learn from this?
AGREED BUT WHAT IS THE ALTERNATIVE: — PUSH RUSSIA TO BE DEFEATED? WELCOME WW3... — MAKE AN USAVOURY DEAL FOR THE WEST? NO RETURN TO THE MINKS AGREEMENTS AND RUSSIA GETS MORE THAN IT WANTED THEN, DURING THE 2022 ISTAMBUL PEACE TALKS. — UKRAINE IN NATO? DON'T THINK ABOUT IT... — UKRAINE IN THE EU? TOLERATED BY RUSSIA (NOTE: UKRAINE IN THE EU WOULD SLOW DOWN THE ECONOMY OF THE EUROPEAN UNION) — MAKE THE MINERAL DEAL? EVEN TRUMP ADMITTED THAT "HE DOES NOT KNOW HOW MUCH THE US CAN GET OUT OF UKRAINE" BUT UKRAINE (THE KIEV REGIME) IS ALREADY MORTGAGED AND SOLD OUT TO WESTERN INTERESTS SUCH AS BLACKROCK. ADDING A MINERAL DEAL AT 50/50 IS A BETTER DEAL.
SO: MAKE A DEAL PRONTO BEFORE THE SHIT HITS THE FAN: NO NATO IN "UKRAINE" (WHAT'S LEFT OF IT) THE DONBASS REPUBLICS ARE NOW BACK IN THE RUSSIAN FOLD — AS THEY USED TO BE PRIOR 1922. THE RUSSIANS WON'T ABANDON THESE AGAIN. THESE WILL ALSO INCLUDE ODESSA (OR AS AN AUTONOMOUS REGION), KHERSON AND KHARKIV..... CRIMEA IS RUSSIAN — AS IT USED TO BE PRIOR 1954 TRANSNISTRIA WILL BE PART OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION. A MEMORANDUM OF NON-AGGRESSION BETWEEN RUSSIA AND THE USA.
EASY.
READ FROM TOP.
YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT.
Gus Leonisky POLITICAL CARTOONIST SINCE 1951.
|
User login |
tanks instead of VW....
Bruegel believes that from a "macroeconomic perspective," a debt-funded increase in defense spending could even boost European economic activity "at a time when the upcoming trade war may undermine external demand."
Concerns over Donald Trump's threat to impose high tariffs on European cars have led investors to sell auto stocks and buy shares in defense companies, which they see as having strong growth potential.
Rafael Loss, the ECFR expert, also thinks that expanding Germany's military could have positive effects on the national economy and contribute to overcoming the country's growth weakness. "If jobs in the automotive supply chain could be preserved by shifting production to defense-related goods, that would be certainly beneficial," he said, cautioning at the same time against "overestimating" the broader economic impact.
This article was originally written in German.
https://www.dw.com/en/what-would-it-cost-europe-to-defend-itself-without-the-us/a-71814847
READ FROM TOP.
YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT.
Gus Leonisky
POLITICAL CARTOONIST SINCE 1951.
bankrupt EU....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wbmfMSEhjHs
CNN Host Accidentally Admits Trump Was Right On-AirDave Rubin of "The Rubin Report" shares a DM clip of CNN’s Jake Tapper accidentally admitting to Rep. Brian Mast that Trump’s predictions about Germany and Europe funding Russia during the Ukraine War, with their reliance on Russian gas and oil imports, were correct.
MEANWHILE:
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has proposed that member states spend about $840 billion on defense to strengthen their military self-sufficiency – an amount more than double total EU defense expenditure in 2024.
In a statement on Tuesday, the EU chief cited the “most dangerous of times” and the “grave” threats facing the bloc as reasons to assume greater responsibility for its own security.
“We are in an era of rearmament,” von der Leyen declared, adding that she had sent a letter outlining her ‘ReArm Europe Plan’ to member state leaders ahead of the European Council meeting later this week.
“ReArm Europe could mobilize close to €800 billion ($840 billion) for a safe and resilient Europe,” she said. “This is a moment for Europe. And we are ready to step up.”
Official data shows the bloc’s total defense spending reached an estimated $344 billion last year, marking an increase of more than 30% since 2021.
The new plan includes $158 billion in loans available to member states to invest in what von der Leyen described as “pan-European capability domains,” including air and missile defense, artillery systems, missiles and ammunition, drones, and anti-drone technology. It will also address other needs, from cybersecurity to military mobility.
The proposed five-part strategy is also designed to address the “short-term urgency” of supporting Ukraine, the EU chief said.
Von der Leyen did not specify a detailed timeline, but emphasized that defense spending must increase “urgently now but also over a longer period over this decade.”
Her announcement came just hours after news agencies reported on Monday that US President Donald Trump had ordered a pause on military aid to Ukraine. Trump has repeatedly accused Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky of refusing to negotiate peace with Russia and exploiting US support for his own gain. Following Zelensky’s public clash with Trump and US Vice President J.D. Vance on Friday, the US president said America would no longer tolerate the Ukrainian leader’s attitude.
The EU has historically depended significantly on the US for its security, primarily through the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). However, the Trump administration has recently signaled a major policy shift, urging European nations to take the lead in their own defense, as well as Kiev’s. Last month, Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth said that Washington intended to refocus its military priorities on countering China, warning the EU not to assume that American forces would remain in the region indefinitely.
Trump has previously warned that under his leadership the US would not defend NATO countries that fail to meet their financial commitments. He has floated the idea of raising mandatory defense spending by members to 5% of GDP, though none – including the US – currently meet that threshold.
His push for increased defense spending has drawn mixed reactions, with some EU officials questioning its economic feasibility. European officials have occasionally raised concerns that Trump could pull the US out of the organization.
Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Aleksandr Grushko recently warned that NATO appears to be preparing for war with Moscow, arguing that its current course poses a threat both to Russia and to overall security architecture.
https://www.rt.com/news/613676-eu-defense-spending-increase/
READ FROM TOP.
YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT.
Gus Leonisky
POLITICAL CARTOONIST SINCE 1951.
IF I WAS RUSSIA, I WOULD STOP ALL DELIVERIES OF GAS AND OIL TO THE EU PROTAGONISTS AND ASK MY FRIENDS IN OPEC TO DO THE SAME...