- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
Summary
European officials are preparing a multibillion-dollar defense package to bolster regional security and support Ukraine, announced by German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock at the Munich Security Conference.
The package, potentially valued up to 700 billion euros, will fund military training, arms deliveries, and security guarantees amid concerns over Russian aggression and diminishing U.S. contributions to NATO.
The move follows calls for Europe to boost its own defense spending while U.S.-Russian talks, which exclude Ukraine and Europe, on ending the Ukraine conflict continue.
Finally Ukraine is getting the help they need! Kick out Russia once and for all!
Most of that money will likely go into expanding the defense industrial base and infrastructure. That includes not just buildings but training and hiring engineers and technicians.
Lots of essential things in NATO are run by USA. Airlift capability is a big example. Luckily Ukraine has some serious capability there and cooperation has been done for a long time already. Building an independent intelligence infrastructure, satellites, and so on is a major task as well. Command organization is built around the US and will need to be built as well. Training of Air Force pilots also happens in the US for most European militaries. That means building air bases, infrastructure, hiring and training additional staff, etc. Nuclear weapons and delivery systems are another big concern.
Europe has capabilities in all of this already, but it’s dwarfed by the US.
Europe will likely have to spend double the rumored 700 billion to achieve something credible.
So, what you’re saying is that this spending package for defense is NonCredible?
This might actually be the silver lining of it all.
There has been an uncomfortable disparity between words of support and actual support. I heard many times that the ultimate goal the Pentagon wants to achieve is Russia not losing the war. Out of (comprehensible) fear a falling dictator might throw a last Tantrum235. Germany has also been firmly sitting on the brakes from the start. Remember 5000 helmets? And the (for some Ukrainians literally) gut-tearing discussions at each and every step, wether this is Putins red line, or that is Putins red line, wether this or that might escalate the war, all while Putin escalates the war.
Now that the DSA have kissed themselves goodbye, Europe seems to finally realize what’s at stake and oops they can do something about it. So there is hope Germany might get it’s fat ass off the track. There is even talk about Germany taking a leadership role, though given the context, this must be dark humour. Gotta love that.
Fingers crossed Europe unites in action and Ukraine is getting the help they need! Doing otherwise would send a strong signal to the new Imperialists in east and west that you can pick and chew at our borders, be it the Baltics or Greenland.
Remember how it took like two days to overturn 70 years of precedence of “no weapons delivery into crisis regions”? Without us actually having a debate about it because there was an overwhelming majority for it from the get-go? Those 5000 helmets were part of the initial “find what we have and what we can legally send” order, which then arrived in Ukraine in the same shipment as the first actual weapons.
The, say, tank situation is ambiguous, I don’t have enough insider information to actually make a judgement. Either Germany said “only if the US says it’s ok” or Germany said “let’s put some political pressure on the US to get into the game, to commit”. Ultimately, Germany shipped everything but Taurus. I think we should – and much of the parliament agrees. Majority, actually, but not the governing majority so as is tradition parties voted against their own actual position. I guess that it’s being held back so something is being held back so that certain peacenik SPD parliamentarians can be assuaged.
FDP is probably out and with that ideological (instead of merely populist) sentiment against spending money, Black-Green looks quite likely and in case anyone is confused yes the Greens are hawkish AF about this one. The discussions around Yugoslavia turned them from singing kumba ya into liberal interventionists and I haven’t heard “olive-green” used as an insult in quite a while.
Oh, thanks. Yeah, now I remember making that jump, too, although it took me more than two days. Wild times.
Hofreiter (Greens) put it quite well … something like … not our ideals have changed, but the world has changed, brutally so.
I think you did well in dialing back my comment and adding more context, although I still think there was truth in it.
Now that’s the kind of Greens I like to see.
Just curious, how can a right wing-green coalition be viable? Don’t they clash on many major issues? Or to they succeed at walking the narrow tightrope of compromise?
The Greens in Baden-Württemberg are to the right of the CDU in Schleswig-Holstein. The Greens aren’t a left-wing party as such, they’re liberals. Not neolibs but soclibs but liberals nontheless, and the CDU is perfectly capable of getting into coalitions with the SPD which is to the left of that. Well, at least on paper.
Germany is the 2nd / 3rd largest contributor with about €15 billion. And you bring up 5000 helmets? That’s just pathetic and false.
Also, make sure to use per capita numbers.
Not sure how 0.00006 helmets per capita is the better figure, but there you go.
Yes, I mean, for Germany, being the 3rd largest economy in the world (only surpassed by the USA and China), it would be a real shame if they were not among the topmost supporters in total. Here, it makes much more sense to use per capita numbers, relate to GDP or whatever. Compared to it’s economic potential, Germany is merely #15 in supporting Ukraine with Denmark, Finland, and the Baltics doing at least twice as much.
If you deem the bit about the 0…6 helmets per capita to be false, what’s the correct take?