Choices We Ignore That Our Leaders Cannot (And We Pay Their Prices)

Between Scylla and Charybdis

Between Scylla and Charybdis

Europe is quietly (so far as U.S. news reports are concerned) declining to improve economically. It remains Stuck   in its Greatest Depression and can no more find its way out than can the U.S. But there is one very significant difference that is now coming from the rear to the fore and will prove troublesome in our changing world.

Post WWII as ultimately the lone “Superpower,” the U.S. has served via NATO as  the guarantor of European peace. The last real threat vanished with the Soviets in 1991. NATO members guarantee to defend each other, with the U.S. seen as everybody’s big brother. And this has emboldened the European politicians to skimp on military spending in favor of social welfare that garners more votes. Why not? There has always been the big brother U.S. standing behind Europe as its bodyguard.  But nothing i forever, right? And politicians are famously short-sighted. That equation doesn’t balance anymore.

We have three new world geopolitical realities or perhaps better, resurgent old ones. One: China is destabilizing Asia, Two: Russia is destabilizing Europe and Three: The U.S. has expended its wealth and reduced its ability to continue producing more of it. It can no longer serve as the ultimate peacemaker, leaving Europe and to an extent, Asia,  inadequately defended.


This is obvious to China, that is now throwing its weight around past accepted international boundaries in the China Sea. It is clear to Russia, that is gnawing at Ukraine, drooling over Moldova and eyeing the Baltics, Finland and even scaring Kazakhstan and Poland. And if the Arabs have the oil, Russian gas heats much of western Europe in the winter.

China and Russia have been rebuilding and modernizing their military power. Europe has been strengthening its social welfare. And the U.S. is backing away from world policing for lack of money to perform it.

So the governors in Europe have decisions to make. They, as does the U.S, now must choose to spend more on military and less on social welfare, or continue with the opposite in the face of Russian and Chinese belligerence. Southern Europe is already suffering economically and has little to contribute to either military or decent living for mow. And the few mostly small northern countries in better shape are too small to matter in this.

So, will Europe lie down on the tracks in front of the oncoming trains, trying to keep their welfare societies going or will it divert resources from welfare into military defenses to replace the receding U.S? These seem to resemble the famous “rock and a hard place” between which are situated folks with only two choices, both unpleasant in consequence. Bibi Netanyahu in Israel, stuck between aggressive Arabs on one side and increasingly pro-Arab ‘supporters’ on the other, is not the only world leader facing unattractive choices.

In the U.S, the Obamafolk see a slightly different but no less troublesome reflection in their magic policy mirror. They are reducing both American military capability and the spending previously supporting its worldwide use because there is no money to continue. They are receiving increasing flak as this encourages regional bad boys to come out to play. The U.S. has spent more on its military than the next twelve largest spenders put together; it can well feel safe with substantial reductions in spending. But not so those who have been depending upon U.S. protection. They face choices.

European and smaller Asian countries that have been in the U.S. orbit, now must decide whether to build up their own military at the expense of disgruntling their welfare societies via reduced welfare budgets to pay for the military, or to cuddle up to the new local bully boys and flip off the U.S. as the price of keeping up the welfare. America seems likely to see fewer “friends” in the world as these changes progress. The geopolitical world is shifting. And the international financial system is a major part of this, but that’s another story. Author Francis Fukuyama wrote of “The End of History” in 1992 but it seems to us, that history will only end with the end of humankind.

About Jack Curtis

Suspicious of government, doubtful of economics, fond of figure skating (but the off-ice part, not so much) Couple of degrees in government, a few medals in figure skating; just reading and suspicion for economics ...
This entry was posted in Competition, Depression, E.U., Foriegn Policy and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to Choices We Ignore That Our Leaders Cannot (And We Pay Their Prices)

  1. This subject is VERY under-examined in the mainstream media. The de-militarisation of the separate European States has on the face of it been done in order to introduce a single EU military (ha ha). One can imagine that such a body would be as effective as the UN military has not been in practice. Unwilling to face conflict. Subject to intranecine squabbles. Slow to respond while the extended bureaucracy thinks about it. In addition the separate countries do NOT agree on foreign policies. Disabling the nation states military bodies is easy. Replacing them with anything equivalently functional is a monumental task. EU has done everything possible to dissolve internal and external borders. It seems to think that borders cause conflicts rather than prevent them. EU’s brainless Utopianism will be the death of us.

    • Jack Curtis says:

      Hmnn … From all these thousands of miles away, the E.U. looks a bit like a loose tent, flapping in a freshening breeze … giving rise to wondering about its permanence. How do you keep Greeks, Italians and Germans in the same financial system? Seems to me, that’s open yet …

      • The “powers-that-be” were advised by those with economic brains that it wouldn’t work. But in order to push unification there needed to be something to make the place look unified. With disastrous results. I believe the problems each of the countries had would have been there, but the EU has increased them and added extra.

  2. Jack Curtis says:

    May God preserve us from government help and other terminal disease …

  3. That would make God anti-government. Is that why the govt is attacking the churches?

    • Jack Curtis says:

      Hmnn … He can’t, seems to me, be anti-government; He designed us and it seems built in. But don’t I note a certain caution, a distance maintained in quotes like: “Render unto Ceasar …” that at least, suggests His unwillingness to allow government into His territory?

      Beauty here remains I suppose, in the eye of the beholder; an E.U. official or resident of 10 Downing St. would like see Ceasar’s territory larger than do I….

  4. “Render unto Ceasar” the answer was indeed a two-sided coin. The Pharisees hoped to use the Romans as a cats paw to attack Jesus, so they set a trap. With Roman supporters present they asked Jesus a trick question – to whom do you owe your allegiance. The Jews were subject to Rome and Rome maintained that their emperor was a god-king – a bugbear for the Jews and later the Christians. Only one half of the answer has been iterated – render to Ceasar etc. conveniently interpreted through the ages as – pay your taxes. But Jesus’ reply was cryptic. He also said – and to God what is God’s. Which is subject to a double meaning. To a Roman citizen Jesus was just saying you owe allegiance to Caesar. But to Jews, and anyone who did NOT subscribe to the view that the Emperor/state was god and therefore entitled to that deference, Jesus was saying ALL human beings owe their first allegiance to God, who is greater than the state. So he escaped the trap. His second meaning has not been iterated through the ages.
    Any totalitarian state wishing to eliminate all alternative allegiances, and disable criticism will be anti-religion, in our context, anti-Christian and anti-Jew.
    In my long-winded way I am agreeing with you. (you said in 9 words what I blabbered on – ah well).

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s