Eternal war in Ukraine. Is the EU really ready to fight it?
The war in Ukraine, if not concluded in an agreed way, could be the grave of the EU, and the periodical owned by the Elkann family, The Economist, clearly tells us this.
In an interesting article, even if written from behind the lines, advice is given to the Kiev government and its allies on how to conduct the war. An easy activity, when you are behind the lines, in the warmth of your office, a little more complex if you were under fire, but let's see the contents.
We start from the observation that the traditional counteroffensive plan made by Kiev does not seem to be working. Despite heroic efforts and breaches of Russian defenses near Robotyne, Ukraine liberated less than 0.25% of Russian-occupied territory as of June. The 1,000 kilometer front line has barely changed. Maybe 2% of the territory occupied in recent weeks can be freed, but at what price?
Therefore we need to change the type of war and move to a low intensity one, based on investments and technology. Not even in 1940 was it thought that it would be possible to keep soldiers on the front forever, and it cannot be done in 2023. Human forces are running out, so we need to change the war and move on to one that reduces losses in human resources and uses technology to wear out Russian structures. A strategy so new that Diaz applied it in 1917-218. This, however, does not take into account the fact that the Russians will do the same thing and that in a war of material wear and tear one must be sure of having the technological and industrial prevalence. Are we sure that Europe and the US have these superior production capacities?
The British periodical takes it for granted that there is no room for a ceasefire and negotiation, but the change in strategy and low intensity war are, like it or not, the first step towards a ceasefire. Let's take as an example what happened on the Korean peninsula: a ceasefire was forcibly reached and a situation that is not peace, but not even a war waged. Of course, having a unified and democratic Korea would have been the optimal solution, but the optimal is not the possible and is the enemy of the good.
The article ultimately talks about a sort of "Ukrainization" of the war which shows the tiredness of the Western elite towards the conflict and which recalls the "Vietnamization" of the conflict of the 1960s and 1970s in the Far East, a situation which led to the divestment of Vietnam of the South, after tens of thousands of deaths, at this point useless, among American soldiers. How happy will the Ukrainian soldiers sent to attack the Robotyne area be now knowing that these efforts will perhaps be useless?
The German journalist Thomas Fazi, commenting on the article on . One wonders whether or not he is serious in these statements. Given that it is not only Trump who wants a solution to the conflict, but several parties are asking questions, but the conclusions are completely unrealistic. The USA alone sent aid almost three times as much as Germany
Without Germany you see smaller EU countries, such as Sweden and Poland, which are also strengthening their army due to their proximity to Russia. Poland is on its way to being the strongest NATO army in Europe. But do you see France, Italy or Spain in the ranking? No, because the permanent economic war in the EU, fought by Germany and the Commission against other states, prevents any investment. Have you heard the news of the construction of just one more tank in Italy not to send it to Ukraine, but to strengthen the army? No. Have you heard about the production of Centauro 2 in 2023? No, the last ones were ordered in that year, and there were 16 of them, those who jump into a day of serious combat in Ukraine. Have you heard of the construction of a single French wagon? No, at most they start with hypothetical thirty-year contracts that will lead to nothing. Without considering the social and political repercussions of a strong military commitment in Ukraine: everything is cut to send weapons to a conflict seen as distant. What percentage do you want the AfD to reach in Germany? At 40%,
Thinking that Western Europe can replace the USA is not in the economic, industrial and sociopolitical reality of the facts. Given 30 years of demolition of the industrial apparatus, of civil economic struggle, bloodier than a conventional bombing, of humiliation of democracy, one cannot think of pretending nothing has happened and fighting a long-term war of exhaustion, with the Russia. It would take 10 years of preparation, a 180 degree reversal of the policies of recent years, and we see no intention of making these changes.
The Commission thinks it will solve everything with a few billion more spent on the production of bullets, as if the entire industrial infrastructure could arise from nothing, in the midst of decadence, because that's what Von Der Leyen wants, not even the Sun King could have done so much , let alone the German lady, Not to mention that Louis XIV laid the foundations of the guillotine for Louis XVI.
Don't want to deal with Putin? Either find a modus vivendi, as happened in Korea, or prepare for a European political revolution. Which solution is the best?
Thanks to our Telegram channel you can stay updated on the publication of new Economic Scenarios articles.
The article Eternal war in Ukraine. Is the EU really ready to fight it? comes from Economic Scenarios .
This is a machine translation of a post published on Scenari Economici at the URL https://scenarieconomici.it/guerra-eterna-in-ucraina-la-ue-e-veramente-pronta-a-combatterla/ on Fri, 29 Sep 2023 09:00:09 +0000.