[mdemare]

Whatever the economic merits and demerits of this deal, politically it's a disaster, as this article indicates. There wasn't even an attempt to sell this to the public. But as there are no elections until 2028, I expect major changes in strategy in a year or so, otherwise the center-right parties in charge now will be wiped out in favor of the anti-American factions of the far right and far left.

My suspicion is that there's a quid-pro-quo regarding Ukraine. Economically, the EU is in a strong position, but militarily, a mercurial US has the EU over the barrel due to the Ukraine war.

I predict that Europe's notoriously hard-nosed negotiators (Brexit) will ramp up the pressure as the midterms get closer and if the situation in Ukraine improves.

[silvestrov]

I think many Americans don't understand that the war in Ukraine is not a hobby for Europe like the Vietnam/Korea/Afghanistan/Iraq war were for the US.

European security depends on winning the Ukraine war.

Anders Puck Nielsen explains it here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RxapAZRYJ6I

This is why it makes sense to eat the tariffs as long as it keeps the weapons flowing from the US and why EU doesn't mind much paying for them.

[sunshine-o]

> European security depends on winning the Ukraine war.

This is absurd.

Before 2021 and people were told to "care" about it, Ukraine was a "Westworld" type place for Europeans and others.

If European security depends on Ukraine, why didn't Europe sent any troops there?

This is very new, we fight an existential war now without sending any troops, money should be enough.

Anyway the fact is almost 4 years in Ukraine is probably dead demographically. You can't really reboot a country after having so much of its "fighting age" male population dead. Especially because the one who will be left will be deranged, violent and addicted to all sort of things.

And then having this type of nightmare on or within your borders is another pandora box. So now whether the EU declares it wins or looses the war, it has lost anyway.

On the EU internal politics side, we are literally living in the Star Wars prequel trilogy. No need for much explanations.

[petertodd]

> Anyway the fact is almost 4 years in Ukraine is probably dead demographically. You can't really reboot a country after having so much of its "fighting age" male population dead.

You should actually look up the facts before making assumptions. Or, for example, actually visit Ukraine. Currently conscription is between ages 25 and 55; mobilization of younger men is not done specifically to ensure the next generation is not depleted, and men of all ages are fighting. You're actually more likely to get called up if you are in your 30's and 40's than if you are younger.

There's about five million males currently in Ukraine in that age range, of which under 100,000 have been killed and under 500,000 wounded. That's just not an existential crisis at all. Germany the country survived WW2, and about half of their male population died in the war.

This matches the on-the-ground reality: I've visited plenty of Ukrainian cities during the war, and there are plenty of males of all ages. Including young males. Any crisis they face is the same birthrate crisis that all developed countries face. And hopefully, the psychology of war will help reverse that --- Israel also has a notably high birthrate.

> Especially because the one who will be left will be deranged, violent and addicted to all sort of things.

I personally know quite a few Ukrainian soldiers who have seen action. They're all well functioning people. Combat when you're on the side of good rather than evil doesn't have the psychological toil people think it does. It's not nothing. But the supermajority of people recover just fine and go on to lead productive lives.

An important part of that is recognizing that Ukraine is up against an irredeemably evil enemy. You were killing orcs, not men.

[FirmwareBurner]

>I personally know quite a few Ukrainian soldiers who have seen action. They're all well functioning people.

What kind of "action" did they see, pushing pencils? Because all soldiers who I saw coming out from action on the front line, meaning killing and seeing your friends get killed under firearms, drones and artillery shells, all had various forms of PTSD. There's no way sane normal people don't get affected witnessing that and can just bounce back to be "well functioning people" as you claim. So maybe they lied to you about their action.

> Combat when you're on the side of good rather than evil doesn't have the psychological toil people think it does.

Then why are so many men deserting and dodging the draft to leave the country, if fighting so chill? Some often almost die trying to cross the border to my country. That pretty much tells me everything.

[petertodd]

> What kind of "action" did they see, pushing pencils?

Frontline trench warfare, including getting wounded.

A high % of the young male population saw combat in WW2. What followed was some of the most successful economic growth and society advancement in human history, especially the US. People are more resilient than you'd think, especially when society as a whole has your back.

This isn't Vietnam or Afghanistan. The mission is crystal clear and vital. Every day at 9am all of Ukraine stops to remember the dead. I've seen this first hand. Cars stop, people get out and stand, and they honor what soldiers are doing for them. It makes a big difference.

[FirmwareBurner]

>A high % of the young male population saw combat in WW2.

Sugarcoated way of saying "most of them died". I wonder what their opinion would be if the dead could speak.

>What followed was some of the most successful economic growth and society advancement in human history

So every 50-100 years or so, we need to kill a lot of people in a world war, so that whoever remains alive in the rubble, gets to see massive economic prosperity because of the labor shortage that follows? Basically, the same thing Mussolini and Hitler were advocating for in their speeches.

Not sure I'd sign up for that. You can keep your "economic growth", I'd rather live mediocre but not die in a war for the elites.

And how will Ukraine achieve this hypothetical growth when all of they're youths moved to Europe? Most Europeans didn't have this luxury of moving to a safe country during and after WW2 but they were forced to fight for their country and then stay and rebuild it. Most Ukrainians are not forced to stay or even if they are, they can smuggle/bribe their way out with money, skills, connection or sheer determination, and can just pack their bags and go shopping for the best country that fits their desires via the asylum system. There was no asylum system of this generosity for Europeans in WW2.

[sunshine-o]

I sure hope you are right but I wouldn't trust too much the official numbers we are told. We know during a war every incentive is there too minimize the causalities of one side. The real number usually appear long after and are always much larger.

> Germany the country survived WW2, and about half of their male population died in the war.

One way to see it is Germany and Europe did not really even survived WWI. The demographic shock and the trauma then lead directly to WWII. At the end Europe has been a shadow of itself since. Most of the problems Europe have today are rippling effects of the deep traumas of the two WW.

Let's say just a third or half the men between 25 and 55 are dead/badly wounded/traumatized/addicted, it will destroy the next generation and society.

Just look on much smaller scale at what the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq did to the US in the last 20 years. Even the few professionals and volunteers who fought it abroad brought back a lot of problems still clearly visible in today american society.

This is why those type of wars need to be avoided or stopped at all cost.

[FirmwareBurner]

>Most of the problems Europe have today are rippling effects of the deep traumas of the two WW.

Can't agree on this when I see what China managed to do starting way worse than Europe and with no marshal plan to help. You can't keep endlessly blaming the distant past. How far in the past does the blaming go?

[sunshine-o]

China is even more shocking example of the consequence of the WWs (and what happened before). Just the cultural revolution was an extreme aftershock of the wars. They did then had their "Marshal plan" with almost the entire world massively investing in their economy.

In Europe for example I vaguely heard the French government collapsed again. One of the reasons is usually that for decades they can't reform their retirement system. This retirement system was designed for the lost and greatest generations demographics after the war but totally unsustainable after that.

After 80 years of "never again" because of the WWs Europe dangerously under invested in its military capabilities, now it is panicking and the pendulum is swinging in the other direction.

Wars create demographic and societal shock waves, this is one of the reason historian focus so much on them.

[petertodd]

> I sure hope you are right but I wouldn't trust too much the official numbers we are told.

I don't have to trust the official numbers. I've been to Ukraine both before and after the full scale invasion. Yes, there are easily visible differences (like the big increase in the number of men you see with visible war wounds). But this isn't a society in collapse. Not yet. Overall, Ukraine is winning this fight and what they're getting in return for that sacrifice is a future.

> Let's say just a third or half the men between 25 and 55 are dead/badly wounded/traumatized/addicted, it will destroy the next generation and society.

Again, we've been through this before. It simply does not destroy society.

> Just look on much smaller scale at what the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq did to the US in the last 20 years. Even the few professionals and volunteers who fought it abroad brought back a lot of problems still clearly visible in today american society.

No. America's biggest problems have nothing to do with veterans. It wasn't a veteran who killed that Ukrainian refugee...

> This is why those type of wars need to be avoided or stopped at all cost.

Do you have a better plan? Russia isn't invading Ukraine out of some religious dispute. They're just war criminals who just want to plunder and steal. Negotiations have been tried over and over before: Russia just violates every agreement ever made. The only solution is to defeat Russia. And the fastest way to do that is to crush Russia's economy... which is exactly what Ukraine is (finally!) doing with their strikes on oil and gas infrastructure.

If you want less harm to be done, help Ukraine win faster.

[sunshine-o]

> If you want less harm to be done, help Ukraine win faster.

That was my point.

What I find disgusting is those type of proxy wars where one side say we fully support you but won't send any troops or really work on a diplomatic solution (see my original comment). So the war continues for years and kill the population.

[tim333]

Dunno. European security since WW2 has depended on the principle that you can't just go invade and take over other countries because you feel like it and are militarily strong. If Russia takes over Ukraine they'd likely force Ukrainians into the Russian army and then threaten to take over the baltics which are part of the EU and NATO. It's easier to defend Ukraine now than face that.

[simion314]

My guess the negotiators had somehow the information that the tariffs will soon be declared illegal so would be smart to let the narcisist think he won, I hope I am right and there is still rule of law in USA.

[stubish]

The negotiators agreed to demands under threat of tariffs that they believed would soon disappear? That makes no sense.

[simion314]

>The negotiators agreed to demands under threat of tariffs that they believed would soon disappear? That makes no sense.

It buys time, the negotiators also have no power to force each country to implement the stuff , or make the agreement some law.

It would make sense to assume illegal tariffs will be declared illegal with 95% of the chance and just buy time and let the nariisit idiot think he won and go ahead and fuck with someone else for now.

[FirmwareBurner]

>Economically, the EU is in a strong position

Compared to who/what/when? The US? China? Not a chance. Economically, the EU is as weak now as it ever was.

About 2 decades ago, EU had the same GDP as the US, or even slightly more. Now it's at half of the US and stagnating or even shrinking due to a series of issues it has no solution to, since a lot of it's economy hasn't recovered much post-2008 crash. The EU knows the economic deck is not staked in its favor so it has to bend over to the US now. 2 decades ago the EU would have been able to fend of such actions from a hostile US administration and even more so fron China. But it can't today because it's twice as weak and the US and China are much stronger.

And it's actually very easy to understand why we're here in this situation. If you look at the government budgets in most EU countries today, about a third everywhere is going to welfare and retirement spending with retirement spending dwarfing absolutely everything else in the country by far, with some pensions being higher than some full time wages, which is absurd IMHO. Now, caring for the people and the elderly is noble and all, but you can't win any competition against nations that take that third of GDP that you spend on retirees and they spend it on on economic and military development instead. You just can't win like this, straight up, the math doesn't math. Eventually over the long run, they'll economically or militarily conquer you. So you'll have to choose between spending on providing a cushy lifestyle for retirees, or ensuring a prosperous future for your country.

EU fell asleep at the wheel for over two decades and woke up today that it needs to start the fire again, but it has no money to do so because it's in a economic downturn, an energy crisis, a demographic crisis, a cost-of-living crisis, political extremism crisis left and right, and war next door needing to fight all these fires at once. Very bad timing for EU, and China, Putin and Trump know this and are taking full advantage of "buying the dip" now in Europe the same way European powers were "buying the dip" in their (former) colonies in Africa and across the world. All, and I really mean ALL countries, engage in economic imperialism every chance they get, and Europe somehow forgot its own lesson thinking they are somehow untouchable.

[mdemare]

The EU economy is $20T vs USA $30T, so 60%. Also, Britain was part of the EU 2 decades ago. The EU economy has almost doubled in that time, with large regional differences (Ireland, Poland on fire, southern Europe flat), but the USA has done better than the eu average.

[surgical_fire]

It's important to mention that key points of this deal still needs to go through the European Parliament.

It's unlikely to go through as even parties that support VDL are against this deal: https://www.politico.eu/article/european-socialists-come-out...

[thrance]

Is there such a thing as the "anti American far right"? As far as I can tell, all these wannabe despots are buddy-buddy with Trump, Musk and MAGA in general.

[mdemare]

Not sure if this is generally known, but historically, going back as far as the second world war, the European far-right has been quite anti-American.

[rainingmonkey]

This trite comment obscures the long history of transatlantic ties on the far right, from American businesses supporting Nazi Germany[1] and Hitler drawing inspirations from America's immigration, segregation and eugenics policies[2] through the murky events around Operation Gladio later in the 20th century[3] and into the 21st century "dark enlightenment" hyper-online right[4].

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_collaboration_with_Na... [2]: https://press.princeton.edu/books/paperback/9780691183060/hi... [3]: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2000/jun/24/terrorism [4]: https://archive.is/A3Gb1#selection-2423.27-2423.39

[aredox]

Well, the American far right is now also anti-American...

[CamperBob2]

Well, the American far right is now also anti-American...

Just as it was in the pre-WWII timeframe. Henry Ford could have taught Elon Musk a thing or two about racial purity. And if there's even a smidgen of truth to Smedley Butler's testimony about the so-called Business Plot...

None of what's happening now is new. We just forgot, that's all.

[axus]

No True American

[asimovfan]

no. there isn't. there is also no anti-america far left. especially not in the context of any future negotiations with the US.

[rdm_blackhole]

There are clearly in the EU some far-left parties who believe that being part of NATO and/or following the foreign diplomacy of the US is not in our best interests.

[js8]

I am leftist of the opinion that being in NATO is against european interest. However, I don't see it (and I don't think I am alone in that view) as an antiamerican position as such, more like internationalist position of rejecting imperialism. I believe all countries would benefit by having less nuclear weapons, for instance.

[Jensson]

Communist far leftists hating America has been a thing all over Europe. They said far left, not just left.

[jacekm]

I wouldn't mind "security in exchange for better economic treatment" deal, but I don't understand how anybody still trusts US in terms of security. They clearly showed that they fear Russia, plus Trump made several allegations that they may not provide military help even to NATO allies. I am from Poland, theoretically we have US troops stationed here but over 70% of population (including myself) don't believe they will stay here long once we're attacked.

US got concrete economic concessions in writing in exchange for words about security.

[AnotherGoodName]

A good example we just saw today. Countries with security arrangements with the USA can be bombed freely by those with more favor with the current US leadership.

[NicoJuicy]

Tbh. I think more that everyone just names a number to make Trump happy and that it's not enforced.

[helqn]

> There wasn't even an attempt to sell this to the public.

EU policy about everything in a nutshell. We are not consulted or taken into account about absolutely anything. What would we even do about it?