this post was submitted on 24 Apr 2024
149 points (88.6% liked)

World News

39019 readers
2218 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The former president’s return would cement a shift in the U.S. as a fact that can no longer be ignored.

This is the moment most of Europe’s leaders hoped they would never see. The date is November 7, 2024, two days after Donald Trump edged out Joe Biden in the U.S. presidential election, and already the once-and-future president has announced he will force Ukraine to strike a peace deal with Russia and cede territories the Kremlin has claimed as its own.

Gathered in Budapest for a meeting of the European Political Community, the continent’s leaders stare out over the majestic Danube River with just one thing on their mind: How should they react?

Can they double down in the face of Trump’s opposition and finally give Kyiv whatever it takes, as a group of leaders clustered around Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and French President Emmanuel Macron are arguing? Should they follow Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s lead and welcome Trump’s initiative to bring the conflict to an end? Wouldn’t it be better to work with Washington and help shape the deal, as the German and Italian delegations keep saying? And most importantly, how can the continent’s leaders keep the sharp turn in U.S. foreign policy from driving their countries apart?

Trump’s return to the White House is no sure thing, but the possibility is forcing Europe’s leaders to ponder scenarios like this, and grapple with the questions they entail. And as the U.S. election cycle cranks into a higher gear, officials across the continent are becoming increasingly candid about the implications of a second Trump presidency.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 8 points 6 months ago (4 children)

I feel like European leaders are panicking because they are realizing they have to actually lead on military and foreign policy rather than being given the binary choice to support the USA or do nothing. This isn't something they've done in generations.

[–] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 22 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Nah, it's because Trump is batshit insane. People like predictability - everyone sane wants stability (the best among us want stability that progresses to a better state of the world).

Can you say for certain that Trump wouldn't just raid Fort Knox and then flee the county? He doesn't seem to have any desire to actually be president outside of the legal immunity... we're sort of in a Ceaser situation here.

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club -1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Trump may have started it, but you also had issues with Ukrainian aid that forced Democrats to support the Republican Speaker of the House. The USA is starting to show cracks in wanting to stay involved in Europe. If that happens, the EU or other organization needs to be able to put together a plan. Right now, Europe can't.

[–] prole@sh.itjust.works 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

but you also had issues with Ukrainian aid that forced Democrats to support the Republican Speaker of the House.

Yeah that's not what happened.

Shit literally JUST HAPPENED, and you're already lying about it outright.

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

It is usually good form to reply with a correction, if just to inform the others reading.

[–] prole@sh.itjust.works 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

OK, no problem.

It was basically the other way around. The Republican Speaker of the House was forced to support the bill that the Democratic Senate had passed (and the President was ready to sign). Many hardliners in his (the Speaker's) party are not happy with this decision. There was already a split forming there (Speaker Johnson recently signed the thing to keep the Government running while others in his party wanted to hold it hostage like they always do), but this has made it worse.

And to clarify, no the Speaker doesn't have the power alone, but he has a lot of control over his party, and he and the Party Whip will get the votes they need, if that's what they choose to do. So the buck stops with him when it comes to votes like this.

So as I understand it, pretty much the opposite of what you said.

Hopefully that cleared it up, I appreciate that you actually seem interested in finding out.

[–] ryathal@sh.itjust.works 9 points 6 months ago (1 children)

It's not so much support the US or do nothing. The choice was support our interests, or trust that the US will sufficiently support them anyway. That trust is starting to break down, and Europe is learning just how complacent they've been.

If Europe can legitimately become less dependent on US support, that's likely good for almost everyone in the long term. It's going to be really tough for European countries in the short term though. If they fail, it's amazing for the US, and really bad for Europe.

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club -2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I don't think it will be good for the USA if Europe fails.

There has been a multi-decade push to try to get Europe as whole to take more ownership of nearby security issues as the USA is no longer in the hyperpower position it used to be. People live pointing out that the EU has a higher GDP than the USA, but European countries still rely on the USA for basic force projection.

[–] ryathal@sh.itjust.works 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

If Europe fails to reduce dependence on the US, they will functionally become a vassal state, which works well for the US.

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 2 points 6 months ago

Not really. Europe is rather lacking in natural resources, has a lackluster military, and has a population with high economic demands.

[–] d7sdx@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago (2 children)

And we don't want to. We are a post-war society. Europe has fought any war that can be fought. We are done with it. Fuck war.

And we got the Nobel peace prize for it.

[–] Valmond@lemmy.world 8 points 6 months ago

Well now we have to prepare for war so we can have peace.

Europe is slow at the uptake, but the only power in the world that could theoretically beat us is the USA. I mean we'll wake up (hopefully), wipe putin and the kremlin, sternly look at china while we go independent from them, and then we'll probably go back to sleep once again somewhere in 2100.

[–] anarkatten@lemmy.ml 5 points 6 months ago (1 children)

We are a post-war society.

Uh, there is a war on European soil today.

[–] d7sdx@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago
[–] DieguiTux8623@feddit.it -4 points 6 months ago (1 children)

They can still support the US, as all of them have done for the last 79 years and are doing still now.

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 9 points 6 months ago (1 children)

It isn't whether Europe can or can't support the USA, it is that there is a very real possibility that the USA may not be there for Europe in the medium and long term.

A lot of European foreign policy has been reactionary to American foreign policy because it was cheaper and politically easier just to have Americans do it or at least make the strategic decisions. We are now getting to a point where American leadership isn't assured.

The Russian invasion of Ukraine is a lot scarier for Europe if it can't count on the USA to back NATO up.

[–] DieguiTux8623@feddit.it 0 points 6 months ago

I upvoted your comment, because I like the underlying idea that Europe has been "protected" so far because they could not sustain themselves, which is absolutely true. But the previous order collapsing isn't necessarily bad.