- cross-posted to:
- europe@hexbear.net
You must log in or register to comment.
Idk, that may be a little hyperbolic. Of course you can say “it ceases to exist as a relevant military formation” but that’s not what is being said. I don’t see the disintegration of NATO outright, even if NATO-adverse parties get elected or neoliberals change course (which seems the more like the trajectory now). And what is certain is that the US will do whatever it can to influence Europe, which has been doing successfully since after WW2.
I fully expect NATO to disintegrate because NATO can only exist while the US is committed to the project. The US is increasingly pivoting to Asia now, and once the war is lost then Europe will be left holding the bag. At that point it’s going to become obvious to everyone that the US is not going to protect Europe going forward. The US will do whatever it can to influence Europe, but as we’re already seeing in France, Italy, Germany, Hungary, and Slovakia, the public opinion is increasingly turning against Atlanticism. This trend will only continue gaining momentum going forward, and the more established parties try to play games to stay in power the more the resentment will grow.
NATO will keep existing precisely because US needs to force Europe to contribute more for maintenance of Western hegemony.
That only works as long as the Europeans think they’re better off being vassals of the US rather than make peace with Russia. At the end of the day people care about their material conditions first and foremost. As the standard of living in Europe continues to collapse, the opinion is starting to shift against the US.
European prosperity is reliant on exploitation of other countries, and this exploitation can only be maintained in collaboration with USA. For all the idiocy and pro-Western bootlicking of Russian ruling class, they wouldn’t allow Europeans to exploit their country enough for Europe to maintain its quality of life.
The USA has very little interest in European prosperity, and is currently cannibalizing European industry. The reality is that as western countries lose grip on the rest of the world, it’s going to turn on one another. The US being the biggest fish in the western bloc will prey upon its vassals to bolster its own economy.
EU understands that without the US they are certain to lose their position as the neocolonial metropoly and that their only chance is hoping that they would get some scraps for being good running dogs for the US. Anti-American opposition won’t be significant until after the US loses their hegemony.
Personally, I don’t think EU is long for this world. We’re already seeing big cracks forming, and it’s only gonna get worse.
At that point it’s going to become obvious to everyone that the US is not going to protect Europe going forward.
I don’t think Ukraine will change the Russophobia of European political leaders and the desire to have a deterrent against an imagined Russian attack. All that othering and saber rattling has tremendous utility in domestic politics. They’ll want to keep NATO for those reasons, and the U.S. will want to keep it to maintain imperial hegemony, so I see it continuing for some time.
I think the person quote in the OP is discounting the extent to which European political leaders are in on the U.S. plan in Ukraine: the fantasy that they can defeat Russia on the battlefield, which will cause a crisis in their government, which will allow Western capital to scoop up a bunch of cheap assets in the country like the bonanza after the fall of the USSR.
That’s my point though, it’s increasingly looking like the current political class is not really in touch with their constituents. And it’s pretty clear that the parties that are gaining momentum are all anti war, and largely anti NATO. Current political establishment absolutely wants to keep doing what they’re doing, but I doubt they will be able to hold on to power for long. What Todd is saying is that the whole current political order is going to collapse.
I think after the war in Ukraine finishes, BRICS will be evolving more and more quickly. Part of that will probably be the induction of Turkey in BRICS. If that happens, then there’s a very serious possibility that the US-Turkish relations will be coming to a head. That could escalate into a series of events (which might also involve Greece), where Turkey exits or gets expelled from NATO. Turkey being the second largest military force in NATO, its exit might create serious internal issues.
Furthermore, in the very likely scenario that Israel comes out as a loser in its current insanity, that would weaken NATO’s position even further.
In the meantime, if Russia achieves a significant victory and territorial expansion, Europe will have to find a way to co-exist with its neighbor. Western European countries will be hesitant, but eventually they’ll try to reinstate diplomatic and trade relations with Russia, particularly after experiencing a long recession and inability to sustain themselves by importing expensive fuel, steel and other things from the US. They’ll have no choice but to turn to the much cheaper Russian and Chinese (and perhaps decolonized African) solutions. That would mean further divergence of European foreign policy from US foreign policy.
Eastern Europeans are a kind of wildcard, but at least some of them will decide that the new NATO is not enough to support them in a conflict, so they’ll try to lower their belligerence towards Russia and normalize relations as well. Especially if Western Europe seems to be getting along with Russia, nations like Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, maybe Czechia and Poland as well, will be moving closer to Russia.
The US might try to influence the situation in the opposite direction, but unless they do something drastic a la Nord Stream pipeline attack, they won’t really be able to stem the tide. Their only other realistic option is to stoke a (proxy or limited) conflict between US and China, which will drag Europe alongside the US. And even then, it will just prolong the final outcome.
I have to agree that this won’t kill NATO. It will however be extremely important for eventually leading to its decline and death but that’s something easily 10-25 years and several more crises and problems away.
It would somewhat weaken US control on Europe if only because many Europeans would see the sacrifices they made, the hollowed out industry for nothing but a loss in the end anyways and it would influence their perceptions. Their bourgeoisie would be more amenable to wanting to explore other options and arrangements.
But materially the European leadership and means of force (military, police) are under US control and under full sway and commitment to the neo-liberal project and keeping their knight-champion of capitalism the US strong as it is their only hope.
Europe is not free. It has interests which compel it to go along with the US and NATO but even if those interests vanish it could not freely choose. Remember the Snowden revelations. tapping Angela Merkel’s phone by the NSA, double-agents in German intelligence. The US and Britain have thoroughly infiltrated and subverted the intelligence, military, political parties and establishments, and governments of EU nations. They have books full of blackmail on rising politicians and maintain them when new ones appear to maintain control. They move behind the scenes to exert pressure to maneuver preferred people into the lines of succession for power. European media is fully in their thrall when they need it to be. And GLADIO never really ended, it just changed a bit. Beyond that the US literally occupies Germany with troops.
So I don’t think Europe will be free until the US is already significantly weakened and in real decline. They may tug at their leash a bit, cause a little trouble but as long as the US can discipline them by blowing up gas pipelines, or stealing submarine deals from the French they’re still just a dog on a leash and the US is the one holding it.
I will say the first claim is true. That is, if NATO triumphs in Ukraine and Russia were to be defeated or forced to accept a humiliating compromise then it would be strengthened. Forces for independence against it would be further constrained and they would march in ever tighter lock step with the US on foreign policy with regards to China/Russia/BRICS for the forseeable future, perhaps not a century but a quarter century or at least another decade seems likely.
