2 ms·

It would have changed the course but not the objective. The Kremlin apologists in American politics are really disturbing. Putin's objective is to re-integrat

It would have changed the course but not the objective. The Kremlin apologists in American politics are really disturbing. Putin's objective is to re-integrate Ukraine into the 'Russian Empire', he's taking the 500-year view and so 'Nord Stream 2' is irrelevant. NATO acquiescence to his demands would have just changed maybe the nature of Putins' actions, or not but he would have continued. The big issue is obviously now Taiwan. In hindsight, I actually kind of blame the Germans a lot for this. Germany has been very successfully sucking in business and talent from the rest of Europe, building their economy while completely avoiding the 'responsibility' that comes along with that power. Partly military, but definitely geostrategic issues of security. Their, and European energy dependence on Europe is a giant lever that Russia has - we are talking about nulling 'Nord Stream 2' - it means nothing in the big picture. Laughably, nobody is even talking about Nord Stream 1 - i.e. the pipeline already in place. If Merkel were to have re-invigorated in Nuclear investment with a strong commitment to both reducing dependence on Russia and ironically CO2 at the same time, and, made serious improvements to military capabilities with a keen eye to the kinds of activities necessary to actually support fledgeling Belarus, Georgia, and Ukraine, and possibly better more serious coordination with UK, France, Sweden etc. then we may not be in this situation. Ukraine may have regiments of UK, French and Germany units 'training' there at any given time, with support from the US, which really changes the equation a lot. Putin pretty much telegraphed all of his moves years in advanced. Nobody did anything about it. The US could have done more, but this is more directly a European issue and there's a serious lack of leadership over there as well.

jacquesm 5y ago
> In hindsight, I actually kind of blame the Germans a lot for this. Germany has been very successfully sucking in business and talent from the rest of Europe, building their economy while completely avoiding the 'responsibility' that comes along with that power. Partly military, but definitely geostrategic issues of security. The complete lack of historical awareness is impressive.
- jollybean 5y ago
  Lazy ad hominem with total lack of rhetoric or reason is 'impressive' by HN standards. In the meantime, here are some more actual facts: German/European dependence on Russian Energy [1] 'Foreign Policy' articulation of the problem, with specific reference to Germany, and their intransigence on supporting sanctions directly as a result of their energy policy [2] Germany Energy Mix, 1990-2020 [3] which decisively illustrates that if Germany had continued it's Nuclear program - without even expanding it - it could be entirely independent of Russian (and other) imports. Germany's continued disregard TO NATO agreements with respect to military spending [4] and some of the political causes. All the while [5] Germany grows into EU's hegemon (due to favourable Euro policy, weak France, absent UK et. al.) Here is exactly the argument that I am making in academic terms [6] "There is no disputing Germany’s dominant economic role within the eurozone (EZ) and the broader European Union (EU). Its GDP represented 29 percent of total EZ GDP in 2016 and, as of 2015, it was the top intra-EU trade partner for 18 out of 28 countries ... for reasons it is largely responsible for, the growth of exports to the ROW has been growing faster. The German trade surplus, however, is larger with the ROW than it is with other EU nations. Economic leadership in the world or in a region, however, entails responsibilities, especially in a world system of monetary production economies that compete with each other according to political and economic interests." And it goes on to make the fairly obvious case. [1] https://www.newstatesman.com/chart-of-the-day/2022/02/how-europe-is-dependent-on-russian-gas https://www.newstatesman.com/chart-of-the-day/2022/02/how-eu... [2] https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/02/03/germany-energy-sanctions-russia/ https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/02/03/germany-energy-sanction... [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_Germany#/media/File:Energymix_Germany.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_Germany#/medi... [4] https://warontherocks.com/2018/07/the-real-roots-of-germanys-defense-spending-problem/ https://warontherocks.com/2018/07/the-real-roots-of-germanys... [5] https://www.e-ir.info/2021/08/23/europes-hegemon-the-nature-of-german-power-during-europes-crisis-decade/ https://www.e-ir.info/2021/08/23/europes-hegemon-the-nature-... [6] https://www.levyinstitute.org/pubs/wp_913.pdf https://www.levyinstitute.org/pubs/wp_913.pdf

jacquesm 5y ago

> In hindsight, I actually kind of blame the Germans a lot for this. Germany has been very successfully sucking in business and talent from the rest of Europe, building their economy while completely avoiding the 'responsibility' that comes along with that power. Partly military, but definitely geostrategic issues of security. The complete lack of historical awareness is impressive.

jollybean 5y ago
Lazy ad hominem with total lack of rhetoric or reason is 'impressive' by HN standards. In the meantime, here are some more actual facts: German/European dependence on Russian Energy [1] 'Foreign Policy' articulation of the problem, with specific reference to Germany, and their intransigence on supporting sanctions directly as a result of their energy policy [2] Germany Energy Mix, 1990-2020 [3] which decisively illustrates that if Germany had continued it's Nuclear program - without even expanding it - it could be entirely independent of Russian (and other) imports. Germany's continued disregard TO NATO agreements with respect to military spending [4] and some of the political causes. All the while [5] Germany grows into EU's hegemon (due to favourable Euro policy, weak France, absent UK et. al.) Here is exactly the argument that I am making in academic terms [6] "There is no disputing Germany’s dominant economic role within the eurozone (EZ) and the broader European Union (EU). Its GDP represented 29 percent of total EZ GDP in 2016 and, as of 2015, it was the top intra-EU trade partner for 18 out of 28 countries ... for reasons it is largely responsible for, the growth of exports to the ROW has been growing faster. The German trade surplus, however, is larger with the ROW than it is with other EU nations. Economic leadership in the world or in a region, however, entails responsibilities, especially in a world system of monetary production economies that compete with each other according to political and economic interests." And it goes on to make the fairly obvious case. [1] https://www.newstatesman.com/chart-of-the-day/2022/02/how-europe-is-dependent-on-russian-gas https://www.newstatesman.com/chart-of-the-day/2022/02/how-eu... [2] https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/02/03/germany-energy-sanctions-russia/ https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/02/03/germany-energy-sanction... [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_Germany#/media/File:Energymix_Germany.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_Germany#/medi... [4] https://warontherocks.com/2018/07/the-real-roots-of-germanys-defense-spending-problem/ https://warontherocks.com/2018/07/the-real-roots-of-germanys... [5] https://www.e-ir.info/2021/08/23/europes-hegemon-the-nature-of-german-power-during-europes-crisis-decade/ https://www.e-ir.info/2021/08/23/europes-hegemon-the-nature-... [6] https://www.levyinstitute.org/pubs/wp_913.pdf https://www.levyinstitute.org/pubs/wp_913.pdf