[IntPol] NATO BOOM?

[Starfox]

It seems there are lot of misconception or misinformation (voluntary or not) floating on the internet about what's happening around Greenland and what it could mean for NATO, Europe and the US. So let me add a European point of view in there.

NATO is an alliance with a common defense and a particular mechanism to respond to attack on any of its members. It's called article 5. Article 5 is very simple. It states that if a member country of NATO is directly attacked, all other members must come to its aid. Article 5 was invoked only once in all the history of NATO (since 1949) and it was by the US, after 9/11. And guess what... everybody answered present, even France who technically wasn't in NATO anymore but still decided to follow article 5 as Charles de Gaulle had promised when he had France quit NATO (but no matter, DJT says "I don't think they [NATO allies] would help us if we needed it" -- Hey, dickhead, we already did! It must be so convenient to have such a shitty memory.)

The current problem is this: Denmark is a member of NATO, Greenland (a territory of Denmark), is also member of NATO, and of course the US is a member of NATO. If the US attempt to take Greenland by force -- as DJT hinted again and again... and again -- it means that NATO will have to come to the defense of Greenland against another member of NATO. That means, Canada and most of Europe will have to take arms.

Is this really the conflagration that Trump wants? Yes, yes it is. For a number of reasons. First because any talk that is not about Epstein is good for him. Second because like his pal Putin, he believes that strength is the only way to go (we may be in the 21st century, but both of these guys never moved past the 20th, they still have a cold war mentality) even if it is completely idiotic and ruins their respective countries. And also, he wants the resources of Greenland. He doesn't want a deal, he doesn't want to pay for them, he wants it all, like a little child eyeing the toys of his kindergarten "friends". And if things go down the drain well... he's not the one who will do the fighting so basically he doesn't dive a crap. The draft dodger will be free to cower once more between the sheets of the White House.

There's only two results that can be expected from US military intervention on Greenland. Either NATO disintegrates because, what good is a defensive alliance where a member may decide to attack another member at any given moment. What good is article 5 here?

The second result is that NATO will not disintegrate but will radically transform by expelling the USA from its ranks. Despite what Trump may think the rest of NATO doesn't need the US. Sure we best function when we're all together, but better no US than a dysfunctional political system that cannot even recognize his foes from his friends.

If Trump decides to move against Greenland with force, two things are sure: the existence of NATO would be in question and the US leadership would very quickly learn the cost of living in a world where they have no ally left.

And the damage to the US reputation would be almost irreparable (it's already down by a lot, but that would be the absolute next level).

Do I think that this US administration would be stupid enough to try and annex Greenland? Well let's face it. The current POTUS is a degenerate moron with obvious psychiatric issues the least of them being that he is a pathological liar (and yes, I'm not a politician so I don't have to be diplomatic about it). Just stick to the facts and listen what he's constantly babbling about. That should give you an idea of how far gone he is. If it was any previous POTUS well, we wouldn't even be there discussing probabilities, because none of them would have even joked about attacking an ally.

But right now there is a power hungry madman in the White House, and that madman is enabled by other power hungry madmen (and women) constantly reinforcing for him the idea that his ideas and approach are the only ones valid and that it's the rest of the world that doesn't want to understand how right he is. Poor guy... all alone against 7 billions of people. If that's not being delusional, I don't know what is.

So will he decide to go for the military option? After all he already gave orders to the military to draw him a plan for Greenland (don't go with words guys, just pictures, good enough for the guy). There's a chance that this is just a press-op to make himself shine in the spotlights. Let me explain myself: there's a treaty between Denmark, Greenland and the US that was signed in 1951 and is still valid today. This treaty allows the US to have any number of military bases in Greenland to ensure the security of the Arctic. At some point, the US had more than a dozen military bases in Greenland then, at the end of the Cold War, they decided to reduce them to just one. Still, the US could restore those bases even building new ones. There's no need for threats, just inform Greenland that the US needs more bases. As simple as that, really. So the whole thing Trump is going on about that US needs to own Greenland for its security is just a crappy lie as it's often the case coming from him. So why the lie? Because Trump doesn't ask. It's not the image he wants to convey, especially not to his MAGA fans. He wants to be this guy -- that he'll never be anyway -- with big balls of brass that can get anything he wants just by being tough. So he might be threatening Greenland of invasion, then go and build some new bases according to the existing and decades old treaty still in place, and after that pretend that Greenland folded before his might and that no one can oppose him. So he appears to be the tough guy, the one who can get things done. And if you asked him after the facts about the treaty he would probably say "Treaty? What treaty? Don't know what you're talking about. It's me, all me and only me".

Maybe I give him too much credit for even thinking of such a plan. But anyway, even if that was his plan, neither Greenland, Denmark nor Europe can just assume that there won't be any invasion. We're not in the Muppet show. Everything said by the head of state of a country has international repercussions. Other countries don't just go "Oh, he's joking". We have to assume he's being serious and act accordingly. 

So, France and Germany are preparing to send more than 15,000 arctic enabled troops to reinforce the Danish contingent in Greenland, so there would be no question that an attack against Greenland would be an attack against NATO (3 NATO countries, 4 as Canada could also move some troops in Greenland, they are much closer and already arctic ready). Call that a tripwire force if you will. Additionally, France would possibly move a couple of nuclear submarines near Greenland, obviously and officially to deter the so many Russians and Chinese subs present in the area (according to paranoid Trump because he's the only one to see all those threatening subs). Oh, and Denmark has restated their standing order (valid since after world war 2) to their forces in Greenland "Shoot first, ask questions later, don't wait for orders" of course that was with the freshly defeated Nazi in mind back then, but is there a real difference now? The line becomes really blurry.

So as you see, everything is peachy. No problem at all! just another beautiful day in Trump's dystopian universe.

The most amazing in all that is that NATO was built with US impulse to prevent the kind of shit that Trump is suggesting right now, seizing a territory by force. NATO has always been against "might makes right" (which is in part why Trump doesn't like it). With the kind of rhetoric pushed forward by the White House, the US is not the guiding force of Freedom anymore but bears more resemblance to the former Soviet Union or Nazi Germany (with ICE slowly going from low-key Gestapo to full Waffen-SS killing civilians and fully protected by the government, the White House even gets the background right...).

And there will be a price to pay. Real price I mean. Because I haven't even talked about money yet. Most of the American "experts" I have listened to seems to be under the impression that it's all about military might. Well, get that: the EU detains $1.5 trillions in US bonds. Add the UK and it's $700 billions more. What do you think would happen if we decided to sell all of those tomorrow? Yes it would be a shitty exchange rate for Europe because the more you sell, the less you gain, then there would be the issue of the Euro becoming much stronger than the US dollar, but for the US, it would be at the very least very problematic. Honestly we don't want to do that because it would be catastrophic for interest rates in the US and consequently the American people would be the one paying the price on a daily basis while we're only interested in responding to the US administration actions. US bonds are a worst case scenario option but it's just one possible tool in the panoply of an instrument that was created when Trump got crazy with the tariffs earlier last year and that we affectionately call the "trade bazooka". The EU haven't used any part of it yet because, again, there would be bad consequences.

However, Trump and his folks are really pissing us off right now and depending on his next moves he may be on the verge of triggering the worse economical nightmare he has ever seen, yep even worse than his 6 bankruptcies. Worst part of it... he doesn't even seem to realize it as he continues to go on with the crappy warmongering rhetoric, even annoying some in his own political party (not enough of them IMO).

At the same time, Europe is preparing, slowly moving to create a European standing army of 100,000 troops. It would be a supplement to the already existing armies of all EU countries. That army would be fully European, answering to the European Security Council and if you noticed, the 100,000 number hasn't been chosen arbitrarily. It corresponds roughly to the number of US troops rotating in and out of Europe yearly. It means that if Trump wants to pull US troops out of Europe or if we decide to close US military bases in Europe because of the orange idiot attitude, we won't lose anything. The idea of a European standing army is not new. it goes back decades, mainly between France, Germany, the UK and a few others. Each time it was about to become a reality, Washington found a way to shut it down because it was not in American interests (the idea that Europe could develop its own independent military was abhorrent to most US administrations because that meant partially losing control). However now we have reached the "fuck it" stage where, thanks to Trump, Europe doesn't give a crap about Washington opinions anymore.

It's another of those measures Europe has been taking, quietly but surely, to respond to the Trump menace, same as SAFE (Security Action For Europe) that is now in full effect with both EU and non EU countries (one of the non EU countries being Canada and more US allies are lining up to join because they want an option out of Trump's stupidity and unpredictability). Concretely SAFE is a pool of €870 billions spending money over the next 5 years to allow EU members who wish it to quickly strengthen and/or modernize their respective military. They will do this by buying from European companies and associated partners companies (like Canada). The total sum engaged may rise to €3 to €4 trillions over the next 10 years. It's certainly not pocket change but the fact is, the US will just see a fraction of this money, if any at all. I imagine we'll have to buy the stuff that can't be produced in Europe and that's very little.

France for example would only require the catapult system for its next gen nuclear aircraft carrier -- the PANG (she just entered construction phase so she has no real name yet). Until now we used the same catapult system as the US Navy for interoperability reasons; right now, the Charles de Gaulle is the only European aircraft carrier capable of receiving and launching US planes. Question is, what is interoperability really worth in the light of Trump new world views? We're about to phase out our Boeing E3 sentries (that are reaching the end of their life cycle) to replace them with Swedish GlobalEye much more up to date and adapted to modern battlefields and threats. With what happened during the past year, we didn't even thought to look for a US replacement, preferring a European solution.

That's what Trump brings to the USA. A world devoid of partners, allies and customers. The only opportunity Trump really created is for Europe and its partners (and he did it only by accident). Europe is more than happy to seize the opportunity Trump offered to get out of US influence.

And he also gave an opportunity as well to China and Russia (the war in Ukraine might have stopped last year if it wasn't for him giving Putin a boost, and with Venezuela, China finally has a good reason to invade Taiwan, or kidnap its head of state because the US gave the example).

The time for stupidity is over and only Trump continues to play the stupid game. The world is evolving rapidly around him, pushing the US away, and he doesn't even notice or seems to care -- nor do a lot of Americans. When he wakes up from his cozy personal dreamland, Trump will have a hell of a time understanding what happened and how but he will certainly understand why -- one can hope, that is, if he's not too tired of trying to avoid an international tribunal for war crimes. Well, at least he may finally have what he promised... true US isolationism. Welcome back to the beginning of the 20th century.

Maybe it's time to quote de Gaulle when he removed France from NATO in the 1960s and closed all the American bases in the country.

You can be sure that the Americans will commit all the stupidities they can think of, plus some that are beyond imagination.

Boy, was he pissed with the US administration back then. But what do you know... 60 years later and it didn't age a bit. I can imagine that if he was still there he would be like "I told you". And to be precise, de Gaulle wasn't anti-American. He was very grateful to the American soldiers who came to fight in Europe but American soldiers were not American politicians. What he really didn't like was the way Washington was playing, especially after WW2, and it didn't matter who was in the White House, democrat, republican, all the same to him. For good reason too as it was around the time of the "big switch" when democrats became republicans and vice versa. In the light of that switch, who could tell the difference anymore?


============

Sorry for the long post but there are things that needed to be said because I realized from YT and other places that Americans may not be up to date on what happens in Europe. It's like if it was another day in the office for a lot of them and Trump will say and do what he wants to say and do. "Let's wait for the mid-terms". From what I see on the internet, a lot of Americans are still thinking this will blow over as fast as it started. Nope, not going to happen this time.

It's true that Europe tries to be diplomatic about it which in my mind is a mistake. You can't be diplomatic with Trump, it's not working because the guy knows nothing about diplomacy or more precisely, he thinks it's "weakness". Being diplomatic in this case gives him a false impression of "oh, that's fine" when it's nothing but. I wish that European leaders add more of what they truly think in their messages to Trump. "Back off, dickhead!" would probably be a message he understands far better than "We're going to take measures against your plans". Neanderthal talk, it's the only kind of talk he understands. Truly, have you even listen to him speak? We have to go down to his level if we want him to understand the gravity of the situation. Even then, he probably wouldn't. And I don't know about you but I have real difficulty speaking the "2 years old" language he seems to favor. "Ooh, look at all that gold I put in the White House. So shiny!"

Europeans made a lot of mistakes with a guy named Hitler once... We don't intend to repeat them. Even Hitler was surprised when France and the UK drew a line in the sand saying "no more" and stuck with it. He seriously didn't think there would be a war over him invading Poland, and not just any war. This time the line is drawn much sooner than we did with Hitler. We didn't wait 4 years to do it. Europe is pissed off right now to an extent that apparently is not clearly understood in Washington. And the time it will be understood it will probably be too late.