I agree that the European elite of the moment is not ready to hear Trump’s proposal as John’s wise suggestion is articulated here and therefore my fear is the Europeans that have staked their reputation on the war rhetoric will seek to do something to trigger Article 5 and force NATO’s intervention into direct conflict with Russia. Therefore, preempting such move should be of first importance and clearly stated by Trump (something to the effect that Russia is at war with Ukraine and whoever else enters the fray with Russia is on their own) and if Europe still wants to continue with war it will at least be contained in the existing theatre of activities with obvious devastating consequences to hopefully bring everyone to their senses eventually, hopefully earlier rather than later!
Europeans recognise that (U.S.-led) Western foreign policy has been a mess, just as much as Americans do. But I don't think these arguments really hold water.
1) European elites are not psychopaths, they'd would never deliberately get into a direct military conflict with a war-mongering country of over 100M people spanning a territory larger than Europe and with a nuclear weapons arsenal that's the largest in the world... That's an argument *ab* absurdum.
2) Article V doesn't commit NATO members into collective military action in the event of an "attack on one", so there'd be no guarantee that such a high-stakes gambit would even pay off. The wording of the article is deliberately vague, such that if any NATO country has reason to believe that the threat is inflated they simply won't get involved militarily (though may offer economic or diplomatic support). For instance, the only time Article V has been triggered was in 2001, when the U.S. suffered a devastating terrorist attack (9/11). They then triggered Article V, but in the end the U.K. was the only other country which accepted the risk of being dragged into a foreign conflict where the stakes weren't really existential - in fact, the other NATO countries largely opposed the invasion of Iraq and the U.K. has to actually fabricate a threat of "weapons of mass destruction" (the dodgy dossier) just to get democratic consent for the invasion from Parliament and the British people.
3) Europeans generally still believe, however diffidently, in a antiquated value called "honour". Like the U.S., various European countries have committed themselves over the decades to the defence of Ukraine. At the end of the Cold War, the U.K., U.S. and Russia signed the Budapest Memorandum in Hungary guaranteeing the sovereignty and national integrity of Ukraine in exchange for Ukraine's voluntary denuclearisation. Russia deliberately violated that agreement, however legitimate Russians believe their geosecurity concerns are and however vile they believe the current Kyiv regime is, and have covered themselves in dishonour and shame masked in militaristic glory and nationalism. Hungary, where this agreement was signed, has also behaved less than honourably with it's chauvinist obstruction of EU funding support. And now the U.S., which forced Ukraine to lose its nuclear deterrent, exhibits the same dishonourable behaviour by demonstrating that it is no longer committed to Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity. That leaves honourable conduct solely to the Europeans, who quixotically prepare to fight on in defence of Ukraine even though the odds of success are, as many mock, very much against them. Yet the basis for this behaviour is not myopia or suicidal insanity but HONOUR, of the type demonstrated at Thermopylae.
America may have conveniently forgotten it; Europe on the whole has not yet.
4) When the U.S. triggers Article V to rally action against China over an invasion of Taiwan, the U.S. may regret having weakened its transatlantic commitments. It may find that Europeans and even QUAD members have already formed an economic partnership with China, preferring to face off against and isolate the lesser of the two powers, leaving the U.S. very much alone in it's confrontation with a rising China. The next Cold War may be a bitter winter indeed, for a U.S without firm allies...
John said it most explicitly: “The elites have failed us”! I believe the populations of these failed elites are actually smarter than we give them credit for.
I think you three were struggling at the end of the show as to why the Europeans are behaving the way they are. Could it be that there gets to be some critical number of females in leadership positions and there gets to be a turn more to narratives?
Dr. Mearsheimer, I have been following most of your interviews and posts, and I'm trying to understand your views on a couple things. 1) you said on another interview that Zelinsky took his people into war and is a failed leader. I'm wondering how you think he should have responded to the Russian invasion. 2) you said that you think the Trump-Putin deal posed to Z will be that he has to give up the 4 oblasts that Russian now controls and no NATO membership. Yet you also said that you hope Ukraine gets the best deal they can. What would that be? What could Russia give up to make it so that Ukraine is getting something? 3) you said that Europe/Ukraine/US together have failed to stop Russia, yet you also think that Russia is not capable of taking all of Ukraine or other former satellites (so Europe's fears of Russian expansion are unwarranted at the moment). This seems contradictory to me.
Zelinsky took his people to war by listening to the West, talking big, and wanting to join NATO. The US provided missiles that were in Ukraine pointing at Russia. Zelinsky was installed by the West to carry out their policies. Russia has been telling the US and Ukraine that is too close for comfort for Russia to have NATO and its weapons at its doors, to take their missiles away. No one listened. Zelinsky has been proven to be corrupt himself and their Oligarch lined their pockets with the US aid they wre receiving. The US promissed USSR not have NATO in is neighborhood if they broke up the Federation. They lied. I am not a Putin fan but he had to protect his country from NATO's alterior motives.
What "Russian invasion"? You mean the puppet Ukraine's murder and shelling of Russians in eastern Ukraine? Go back to the City of London and quit posting delusional nonsense and hasbara!
At least you have the Gaza situation most correct.
Are you responding to me, SaHiB? I don’t live in London. I’m not sure what delusional content and hasbara you are referring to. And I didn’t say anything about Gaza in this post. Calm down a little. I’m just asking questions to better understand Mearsheimer’s views on Ukraine.
Again I believe it is unnecessarily too strong to say Trump has “contempt” for Europeans (while I believe it is true that many Europeans do have contempt for Trump), but I think it is true that Trump considers them less important (powerful and strategic) than Russia. That is not contempt but just a resetting of relations based on a realistic perspective and economic calculation.
Ukraine had thirty years to get their act together after the fall of the Soviet Union. Instead they let it become an open sore of corruption in Europe. That made their country weak. Compare Ukraine to the Baltics, who in the same time frame, and with a hundredth of the advantages, put themselves into a position where they could even welcome Ukrainian refugees. They did this primarily by saying no to corruption from the first day. The lesson of this is if we, the US or even Germany, let ourselves become weak, we become prey for others. Fighting corruption, a strong civil society, a competent energy policy, taking care of ones own people, and a host of other difficult things are the table stakes for not being on the menu for other countries. Ukraine left their doors open in a neighborhood with an arsonist running around. It's neighbors came to put out the fire so it doesn't spread to their own homes. Now Ukraine will demand we rebuild their house, furnish it to a standard better than before, and protect it from the arsonist, all while having more resources than anyone else in the neighborhood. Ukrainians betrayed their own country by not taking care of it.
Ukraine was willing to take deal offered in 2022… Biden sent British PM to Ukraine to tell PM not to accept… have to keep the American war machine profitable!
European barbarian savages should become human first, before becoming Europeans - of course, that's the basic truth about European and Europe disgusting, disgraceful, dreadful, barbaric past. European barbarian savages, past and present, speak volumes about their inhumanity and barbarism to fellow human beings throughout their history - from colonialism to the slave trade, of which they should be ashamed of themselves. Of course, European barbarian savages are naked - just akin to the king has no clothes proverb. Hence, the European barbarian savages should not be entertained in the civilized, cultured world and should be asked - where to get off!
If Europeans believe that there is enormous American support for what the Trump/Musk alliance is doing to the American economy and functioning of the government, they are sorely mistaken. Medicaid has already been attacked, but that affects a smaller, less dynamic portion of the population. Wait until Social Security and Medicare are torn apart…there will be a major uprising. Midterm elections will tell the tale.
"Threat inflation" is far from foolish - it is prescient. After all, a century ago, Weimar Germany posed no real threat to France, let alone wider Europe. It was weak, indebted, partly occupied by France (the Rheinland), and paying its neighbouring great powers in industrial materials and money. When it reached its hyperinflation crisis in the 20s, many politicians in the British, French and Russian Empire must have thought that this non-imperial country was toast. Yet a decade later it very much was a threat to wider Europe, and seized France in a matter of days... The Russian Federation in relative terms is in a much better position than 20s Weimar Germany for European conquest. It has the largest territory, the largest war-economy, the largest arsenal of the most powerful weapons on the planet, and has already forced the U.S., it's most powerful rival, into what may be a rather humiliating "defeat" (now par for the course - Afghanistan, etc.) after years of proxy war - leaving a disunified bloc of European nations to contend with Russia for hegemony over eastern Europe and the Balkans. It's baffling to me that someone of Mearsheimer's intellect chooses to see power politics as a snapshot of the present moment, rather than as a dynamic and unpredictably changing environment. Putin will not be in charge of Russia forever - we can all recall that there was a military coup attempt by the leader of a mercenary army, Prigozhin, just a couple years ago where troops were marched from Ukraine into Russia, occupied the city of Rostov-on-Don without resistance and then marched on Moscow. None foresaw that, nor can any tell what Russia, Germany, France, the U.S. or even Britain will be like in a decades time. The balance of power, having remained relatively stable despite China's economic rise and Russia's military resurgence, will likely change considerably over the next decade. And not necessarily in the West's favour. Beware the siren song of those who tell you that you have nothing to fear from a nuclear-armed country that invades other countries, whatever provocations may have instigated it. Mideastern countries have long viewed the U.S. with suspicion for good reason; now European countries will view Russia with similar suspicion for good reason.
Strong American leadership is not dependent on how Europe chooses to go for the midterm. Eventually strong American leadership will again determine the world scene. At least I hope so if freedom is to ring again as of old in Europe.
I agree that the European elite of the moment is not ready to hear Trump’s proposal as John’s wise suggestion is articulated here and therefore my fear is the Europeans that have staked their reputation on the war rhetoric will seek to do something to trigger Article 5 and force NATO’s intervention into direct conflict with Russia. Therefore, preempting such move should be of first importance and clearly stated by Trump (something to the effect that Russia is at war with Ukraine and whoever else enters the fray with Russia is on their own) and if Europe still wants to continue with war it will at least be contained in the existing theatre of activities with obvious devastating consequences to hopefully bring everyone to their senses eventually, hopefully earlier rather than later!
Europeans recognise that (U.S.-led) Western foreign policy has been a mess, just as much as Americans do. But I don't think these arguments really hold water.
1) European elites are not psychopaths, they'd would never deliberately get into a direct military conflict with a war-mongering country of over 100M people spanning a territory larger than Europe and with a nuclear weapons arsenal that's the largest in the world... That's an argument *ab* absurdum.
2) Article V doesn't commit NATO members into collective military action in the event of an "attack on one", so there'd be no guarantee that such a high-stakes gambit would even pay off. The wording of the article is deliberately vague, such that if any NATO country has reason to believe that the threat is inflated they simply won't get involved militarily (though may offer economic or diplomatic support). For instance, the only time Article V has been triggered was in 2001, when the U.S. suffered a devastating terrorist attack (9/11). They then triggered Article V, but in the end the U.K. was the only other country which accepted the risk of being dragged into a foreign conflict where the stakes weren't really existential - in fact, the other NATO countries largely opposed the invasion of Iraq and the U.K. has to actually fabricate a threat of "weapons of mass destruction" (the dodgy dossier) just to get democratic consent for the invasion from Parliament and the British people.
3) Europeans generally still believe, however diffidently, in a antiquated value called "honour". Like the U.S., various European countries have committed themselves over the decades to the defence of Ukraine. At the end of the Cold War, the U.K., U.S. and Russia signed the Budapest Memorandum in Hungary guaranteeing the sovereignty and national integrity of Ukraine in exchange for Ukraine's voluntary denuclearisation. Russia deliberately violated that agreement, however legitimate Russians believe their geosecurity concerns are and however vile they believe the current Kyiv regime is, and have covered themselves in dishonour and shame masked in militaristic glory and nationalism. Hungary, where this agreement was signed, has also behaved less than honourably with it's chauvinist obstruction of EU funding support. And now the U.S., which forced Ukraine to lose its nuclear deterrent, exhibits the same dishonourable behaviour by demonstrating that it is no longer committed to Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity. That leaves honourable conduct solely to the Europeans, who quixotically prepare to fight on in defence of Ukraine even though the odds of success are, as many mock, very much against them. Yet the basis for this behaviour is not myopia or suicidal insanity but HONOUR, of the type demonstrated at Thermopylae.
America may have conveniently forgotten it; Europe on the whole has not yet.
4) When the U.S. triggers Article V to rally action against China over an invasion of Taiwan, the U.S. may regret having weakened its transatlantic commitments. It may find that Europeans and even QUAD members have already formed an economic partnership with China, preferring to face off against and isolate the lesser of the two powers, leaving the U.S. very much alone in it's confrontation with a rising China. The next Cold War may be a bitter winter indeed, for a U.S without firm allies...
I understand your logic, but the European elite knows that their populations won't tolerate it. It will mean the end of everything they've worked for.
Not from what I read, and hear from my extensive family in Europe. The people want peace, the leaders want war.
After all, it’s the population who suffers most in war.
John said it most explicitly: “The elites have failed us”! I believe the populations of these failed elites are actually smarter than we give them credit for.
One day I will be able to put into words the depth of the stupidity of the EU
Beyond belief…
I think you three were struggling at the end of the show as to why the Europeans are behaving the way they are. Could it be that there gets to be some critical number of females in leadership positions and there gets to be a turn more to narratives?
Can't help. Isaiah 3:12
Dr. Mearsheimer, I have been following most of your interviews and posts, and I'm trying to understand your views on a couple things. 1) you said on another interview that Zelinsky took his people into war and is a failed leader. I'm wondering how you think he should have responded to the Russian invasion. 2) you said that you think the Trump-Putin deal posed to Z will be that he has to give up the 4 oblasts that Russian now controls and no NATO membership. Yet you also said that you hope Ukraine gets the best deal they can. What would that be? What could Russia give up to make it so that Ukraine is getting something? 3) you said that Europe/Ukraine/US together have failed to stop Russia, yet you also think that Russia is not capable of taking all of Ukraine or other former satellites (so Europe's fears of Russian expansion are unwarranted at the moment). This seems contradictory to me.
Zelinsky took his people to war by listening to the West, talking big, and wanting to join NATO. The US provided missiles that were in Ukraine pointing at Russia. Zelinsky was installed by the West to carry out their policies. Russia has been telling the US and Ukraine that is too close for comfort for Russia to have NATO and its weapons at its doors, to take their missiles away. No one listened. Zelinsky has been proven to be corrupt himself and their Oligarch lined their pockets with the US aid they wre receiving. The US promissed USSR not have NATO in is neighborhood if they broke up the Federation. They lied. I am not a Putin fan but he had to protect his country from NATO's alterior motives.
Roberta, you’ll find the answers on Dr. Mearsheimer's Substack by scrolling back to spring 2022, right after the war started. It's all there.
What "Russian invasion"? You mean the puppet Ukraine's murder and shelling of Russians in eastern Ukraine? Go back to the City of London and quit posting delusional nonsense and hasbara!
At least you have the Gaza situation most correct.
Are you responding to me, SaHiB? I don’t live in London. I’m not sure what delusional content and hasbara you are referring to. And I didn’t say anything about Gaza in this post. Calm down a little. I’m just asking questions to better understand Mearsheimer’s views on Ukraine.
Again I believe it is unnecessarily too strong to say Trump has “contempt” for Europeans (while I believe it is true that many Europeans do have contempt for Trump), but I think it is true that Trump considers them less important (powerful and strategic) than Russia. That is not contempt but just a resetting of relations based on a realistic perspective and economic calculation.
American Pacifier? You betrayed Ukraine.
Ukraine had thirty years to get their act together after the fall of the Soviet Union. Instead they let it become an open sore of corruption in Europe. That made their country weak. Compare Ukraine to the Baltics, who in the same time frame, and with a hundredth of the advantages, put themselves into a position where they could even welcome Ukrainian refugees. They did this primarily by saying no to corruption from the first day. The lesson of this is if we, the US or even Germany, let ourselves become weak, we become prey for others. Fighting corruption, a strong civil society, a competent energy policy, taking care of ones own people, and a host of other difficult things are the table stakes for not being on the menu for other countries. Ukraine left their doors open in a neighborhood with an arsonist running around. It's neighbors came to put out the fire so it doesn't spread to their own homes. Now Ukraine will demand we rebuild their house, furnish it to a standard better than before, and protect it from the arsonist, all while having more resources than anyone else in the neighborhood. Ukrainians betrayed their own country by not taking care of it.
Go back to watching the View hon
Ukraine was willing to take deal offered in 2022… Biden sent British PM to Ukraine to tell PM not to accept… have to keep the American war machine profitable!
If you cannot add to our understanding of the situation, at least you can be polite.
European barbarian savages should become human first, before becoming Europeans - of course, that's the basic truth about European and Europe disgusting, disgraceful, dreadful, barbaric past. European barbarian savages, past and present, speak volumes about their inhumanity and barbarism to fellow human beings throughout their history - from colonialism to the slave trade, of which they should be ashamed of themselves. Of course, European barbarian savages are naked - just akin to the king has no clothes proverb. Hence, the European barbarian savages should not be entertained in the civilized, cultured world and should be asked - where to get off!
Brilliant analysis
If Europeans believe that there is enormous American support for what the Trump/Musk alliance is doing to the American economy and functioning of the government, they are sorely mistaken. Medicaid has already been attacked, but that affects a smaller, less dynamic portion of the population. Wait until Social Security and Medicare are torn apart…there will be a major uprising. Midterm elections will tell the tale.
"Threat inflation" is far from foolish - it is prescient. After all, a century ago, Weimar Germany posed no real threat to France, let alone wider Europe. It was weak, indebted, partly occupied by France (the Rheinland), and paying its neighbouring great powers in industrial materials and money. When it reached its hyperinflation crisis in the 20s, many politicians in the British, French and Russian Empire must have thought that this non-imperial country was toast. Yet a decade later it very much was a threat to wider Europe, and seized France in a matter of days... The Russian Federation in relative terms is in a much better position than 20s Weimar Germany for European conquest. It has the largest territory, the largest war-economy, the largest arsenal of the most powerful weapons on the planet, and has already forced the U.S., it's most powerful rival, into what may be a rather humiliating "defeat" (now par for the course - Afghanistan, etc.) after years of proxy war - leaving a disunified bloc of European nations to contend with Russia for hegemony over eastern Europe and the Balkans. It's baffling to me that someone of Mearsheimer's intellect chooses to see power politics as a snapshot of the present moment, rather than as a dynamic and unpredictably changing environment. Putin will not be in charge of Russia forever - we can all recall that there was a military coup attempt by the leader of a mercenary army, Prigozhin, just a couple years ago where troops were marched from Ukraine into Russia, occupied the city of Rostov-on-Don without resistance and then marched on Moscow. None foresaw that, nor can any tell what Russia, Germany, France, the U.S. or even Britain will be like in a decades time. The balance of power, having remained relatively stable despite China's economic rise and Russia's military resurgence, will likely change considerably over the next decade. And not necessarily in the West's favour. Beware the siren song of those who tell you that you have nothing to fear from a nuclear-armed country that invades other countries, whatever provocations may have instigated it. Mideastern countries have long viewed the U.S. with suspicion for good reason; now European countries will view Russia with similar suspicion for good reason.
Strong American leadership is not dependent on how Europe chooses to go for the midterm. Eventually strong American leadership will again determine the world scene. At least I hope so if freedom is to ring again as of old in Europe.