EUROPE, THE BUTT OF THE JOKE?

ASMP-A FRENCH ATOMIC MISSILE 300 KT MEDIUM RANGE

The United States not only provided money and weapons to Ukrain, it also helped and still helps train Ukrainian soldiers, provides reconnaissance and targeting data, and is at the heart of operational planning from its headquarters in Wiesbaden.

The Europeans will not be able to provide all these services. This is why European leaders who think in terms of continuing the war are frightened by Trump's possible arrival. Whatever happens in the United States, the will of most European leaders to wage war on Russia seems to remain unshaken.

However, the military situation in March 2024 is as follows: Ukrainian forces have lost their offensive capability. They have to content themselves with demonstrating their existence by carrying out attacks on Russian territory, including against the civilian population.

On the other side, the Russians have regained the initiative and seem content to consolidate their current positions, but it's not out of the question that Kharkiv and Odessa could be threatened. In these conditions, after pushing the Ukrainians on the offensive in 2023, the Americans have dictated a defensive strategy for 2024, aimed at holding on to as much territory as possible while limiting human losses.

Looking ahead, they hope the Ukrainian army will be stronger in a year's time, and even stronger in ten years' time. The CIA likes to think ahead.

With a view to withdrawing its involvement in Ukraine, albeit partially, the United States has also dictated that European states sign ten-year bilateral defense commitments with Ukraine, which amounts to bringing Ukraine into NATO through a back door.

Obediently, the main European states - first Great Britain, the most loyal ally, then Germany, the most involved in the conflict, followed by France, Italy and even Canada - have already signed these commitments.

To justify these agreements, the prospect of a Russia whose strategic objective would be not only to conquer the whole of Ukraine, but also to attack the Baltic states and Poland, without fear of a head-on war with NATO, is being bandied about.

These rumors are merely hypotheses, which are not confirmed by Putin's statement or by previous facts. Indeed, Putin has always declared that the crisis in Ukraine was not a conflict over territory and that, as Russia was already the biggest country in the world, it had no interest in conquering new ones. What he wants, according to his statements, is Crimea, Donbass and the neutrality of the part of Ukraine that will not be under Russian control. Moreover, the facts are these: in February 2022, Russia has deployed 190,000 soldiers compared with 400,000 Ukrainian soldiers well trained and equipped by the West since 2014. It would be impossible to conquer Ukraine with such weak resources, or even to occupy it once conquered: it would need to station 1 million soldiers permanently. To attack and occupy Poland and the Baltic States, how many would it need?

At this stage of events, the question is one of negotiation.

Negotiations have already broken down twice, in Minsk and Istanbul, the first time because the United States wanted time to prepare the Ukrainian army for war, the second because they wanted this same army to launch a major offensive with the support of the West, which they presumably expected to succeed.

It was a fiction, visible today. The Ukrainians have achieved all that their armed forces were capable of with Western support. Now we know that Ukraine will never defeat Russia militarily, that there is no miracle weapon, that the Ukrainian armed forces are in a critical state and that a military defeat for Ukraine is looming, despite Western help.

If Western leaders don't want to negotiate today, what do they expect next?

Europe's armies are too weak to take on the Russian army, and the United States has never wanted, nor does it want, a direct confrontation with Russia, because of the nuclear danger and the looming shadow of China.

Since the West has decided that Russia is its long-term enemy, let it prepare for war and have the means to wage it. Let them sharply increase their military budgets, knowing that it will take between five and ten years to reach a sufficient level and convince their public opinion of the merits of a future war against Russia.

In the meantime, they need to digest the humiliation of having overestimated their strength and agree with Russia on a ceasefire followed by peace negotiations, before thinking about war.

Alternatively, as they are now suggesting, they could actively intervene in Ukraine to try to prevent its military defeat, at the risk of a major European war involving the use of tactical atomic weapons. Then, after the considerable massacres and destruction that this great war is likely to entail, perhaps the Europeans will agree to hold talks with Russia, between survivors?

Many Europeans must think that, in a situation that is unfavorable to both Ukraine and Europe, the sooner the better, unless you're willing to be the fall guy.