How Russia Can (And Will?) De-NATO-size Europe

June 6, 2022

In a video published yesterday Gonzalo Lire, currently under house arrest in Karkov, is asking a very interesting question:

What Happens To Europe When Russia Wins? (vid)

Lira states, and I agree with him, that Russia will win the war in the Ukraine, take the south and east to likely create a new country and leave the rest of the cadaver for Poland, Hungary, Romania, Lithuania and others to feast on.

But then what?

The U.S. controlled NATO will still be there. It is practically guaranteed that the U.S. will use it to push for revenge for the loss of Ukraine. This will be done by a steady buildup of troops and long range missile capabilities along Russia's Nordic and Baltic borders and additional naval threats in the northern Arctic as well as the southern Black Sea. Some ten years from now the U.S. would be able to again try to wage a big (proxy) war against Russia. Then with a decent chance to win.

No negotiations or peace agreements will prevent that. The U.S. is famously non-agreement-capable (недоговороспособны). It has broken ALL promises and agreements it has ever made with Russia.

Dozens of U.S. and European luminaries had promised to Russia that NATO would expand 'not one inch' towards Russia. Look where its borders are now. The U.S. and the EU have confiscated huge amounts of Russian state owned money. They have even taken, in contradiction to their own constitutions, the properties of private Russian citizens just because those persons happen to be Russian.

In 2014 Germany and France signed on to guarantee elections for a peaceful regime change in Kiev. A day later the fascists stormed the Ukrainian parliament and those guarantees turned out to be totally worthless. The U.S. simply said fuck the EU. It does not give shit about European interests. Germany and France later negotiated and signed the Minsk-1 and Minsk-2 agreements. They continued to feed billions of EU money into Ukraine even as the Ukrainian government, controlled by the U.S., did nothing to fulfill them. Yes, they were that stupid.

The U.S. has installed 'missile defense' systems in Poland and Romania which are in fact designed to lob Intermediate Range Ballistic Missiles (IRBM) onto Moscow. These are a serious danger to Russia.

Even after Ukraine is finished, NATO and its EU proxies will continue to be a danger to Russia. Both have proven to be unable to keep promises. Russia in consequence will have to rearrange them.

Russia could do that by force. But there will be no march towards Riga, Warsaw, Berlin or Paris. (Remember that Russia has been there and done that which every time has led to major changes in Europe.)

Russia has announced its strategic aims. In December 2021 Russia set forth two agreements which the U.S. and NATO. They included demands for a future arrangement in Europe that would guarantee indivisible security for all. On January 21 2022 the Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov was to meet Secretary of State Anthony Blinken in Geneva to talk about Russia's proposals. Just minutes before that meeting the Foreign Ministry of Russia held a news conference to answer media questions:

Question: What will Russia’s demand that NATO return to the 1997 framework mean for Bulgaria and Romania? Will they have to leave NATO, remove US bases from their territory, or something else?

Answer: You mentioned one of the cornerstones of Russia’s initiatives. It was deliberately set forth with utmost clarity to avoid any ambiguity. We are talking about the withdrawal of foreign forces, equipment, and weapons, as well as taking other steps to return to the set-up we had in 1997 in non-NATO countries. This includes Bulgaria and Romania.

Reuters reported:

MOSCOW (Reuters) – The security guarantees that Russia seeks from the West include provisions requiring NATO forces to leave Romania and Bulgaria, the Russian foreign ministry said on Friday.

Moscow has demanded legally binding guarantees from NATO that the bloc will stop its expansion and return to its 1997 borders.

Replying to a question about what that would mean for Bulgaria and Romania, which joined NATO after 1997, the ministry said Russia wanted all foreign troops, weapons and other military hardware withdrawn from those countries.

After more than 20 years of watching Lavrov and Putin everyone should know that they do not publicly set out aims if they have no way to achieve them. They always have well thought out plans before announcing their goals.

So how can Russia actually achieve a retreat of NATO back to its 1997 borders?

Sanctions. The U.S. has used its economic and military powers to sanction this or that country that did not do as it was told to do by Washington. Unless enacted by the UN Security Council such sanctions have no basis in international law. Despite that the U.S. even used secondary sanctions. It threatened sanctions against Europe, and everyone else, as it ordered them to not deal with Iran or Venezuela.

Alan MacLeod @AlanRMacLeod – 22:45 UTC · Jun 5, 2022

The US is thinking about "allowing" Europe and Venezuela to trade together. Think about what this story tells us about global power relations and who is in charge.

Bloomberg @business – 12:13 UTC · Jun 5, 2022

The US could allow Eni and Repsol to ship Venezuelan oil to Europe as soon as July to make up for Russian crude, Reuters reported trib.al/fQ10QlX

Russia can do similar. But as it always follows international law, it will have to do it in a slightly different way.

Russia is a superpower in that it produces all kinds of raw materials the world, and especially the 'west', needs. Europe, and especially Germany, is depending on natural gas and oil from Russia. Energy prices in Germany will at least triple if it is completely cut off from Russian supplies.

German industry leader have loudly announced that they will have to close shop if the current European policies of restricting Russian energy supplies continues. The chemical giants BASF and Bayer will have to move to some other country. Volkswagen, Mercedes, BMW will have to stop all production in Europe. Steel production would fall to zero. Lack of fertilizer would lead to dependency on foreign agriculture.

Mass unemployment would follow. Millions will be in the street to protest against rolling blackouts, freezing apartments and hyperinflation.

Russia can achieve this at any time. It simply has to stop supplying gas and oil to Europe.

Despite six European 'sanction packages' against Russia there has yet to be a reciprocal response from Russia. It may still hope that European leaders will recognized the deadly game the U.S. is playing with them.

Unfortunately the leaders of Europe are dumb and compromised. The 'olive green' German Minister for Economic Destruction Robert Habeck still dreams of bringing Russia's economy to its knees even as the ruble rises and Germany's economy is falling apart. Chancellor Olaf Scholz was never the brightest bulb in the room. He is deeply compromised through his involvement in the Wireguard scandal. He was the Minister of Finance when reports of the company's billion dollar fraud were suppressed by his ministry. And don't get me going about Ursula van der Leyen who has been proven to be corrupt and incompetent ever since she took her first public office. U.S. secret services will know of many other crimes these people have been involved in.

The current ideological leaders of Europe will have to be replaced by clean ones who follow the German tradition of Realpolitik:

Realpolitik (German: [ʁeˈaːlpoliˌtiːk]; from German real 'realistic, practical, actual', and Politik 'politics'), refers to enacting or engaging in diplomatic or political policies based primarily on considerations of given circumstances and factors, rather than strictly binding itself to explicit ideological notions or moral and ethical premises. In this respect, it shares aspects of its philosophical approach with those of realism and pragmatism. It is often simply referred to as "pragmatism" in politics, e.g. "pursuing pragmatic policies" or "realistic policies".

Only with new and decent leaders will Europe come to its senses.

Russia can help to achieve that while at the same time solving its NATO problem.

It can publicly declare that:

THERE WILL BE NO FURTHER RUSSIAN SUPPLIES OF ANY KIND TO EUROPE UNTIL IT BREAKS WITH WASHINGTON.

What would follow?

Millions of discussions under candlelight would be held in freezing and hungry European households. Political opinions would change. Governments would be replaced with more pragmatic ones.

France and Germany would either have to leave NATO or become impoverished and irrelevant. U.S. troops on European grounds would be asked to leave or be attacked and thrown out by an enraged public. Germany would prohibit the U.S. military from using its airspace. The U.S would lose its grip over the continent.

That can't happen? Well, Gonzalo Lira disagrees and so do I. In early February, before the Russian intervention in Ukraine, I had warned of the consequences of current 'western' policies:

The U.S. strategy to 'fix' Russia in Europe by imposing 'crushing sanctions' on it to then attack China is failing. That is because it was completely misconceived.

Russia is the most autarkic country in the world. It produces nearly everything it needs and has highly desirable products that are in global demand and are especially needed in Europe. Russia also has huge financial reserves. A sanctions strategy against Russia can not work.

The consequences for Europe were obvious:

The U.S. and its proxies in the EU and elsewhere have put up very harsh sanctions on Russia to damage its economy.

The final intent of this economic war is regime change in Russia.

The likely consequence will be regime change in many other countries.
…
All energy consumption in the U.S. and EU will now come at a premium price. This will push the EU and the U.S. into a recession. As Russia will increase the prices for exports of goods in which it has market power – gas, oil, wheat, potassium, titanium, aluminum, palladium, neon etc – the rise in inflation all around the world will become significant.
…
[Russia and China] have spent more brain time on the issue than the U.S. has.

The Europeans should have acknowledged that instead of helping the U.S. to keep up its self-image of a unipolar power.

It will take some time for the new economic realities to settle in. They will likely change the current view of Europe's real strategic interests.

Europe is fortunate in that Russia, even before re-entering the Ukraine, has offered a very decent alternative to U.S. hegemony in Europe:

A man who has Putin's ear, Professor Sergey Karaganov who is the honorary chairman of Russia’s Council on Foreign and Defense Policy, has written an op-ed that points to an alternative.

The piece was requested by and supposed to be published in the Financial Times, which means that it is directed at the European leadership. But the FT has now rejected it for unstated reasons. It was then published in the Russia in Global Affairs journal and has now been re-published by RT.
…
[Karaganov] states:

The security system in Europe, built largely by the West after the 1990s, without a peace treaty having been signed after the end of the previous Cold War, is dangerously unsustainable.

There are a few ways to solve the narrow Ukrainian problem, such as its return to permanent neutrality, or legal guarantees from several key NATO countries not to ever vote for further expansion of the bloc. Diplomats, I assume, have a few others up their sleeves. We do not want to humiliate Brussels by insisting on repudiating its erroneous plea for the open-ended expansion of NATO. We all know the end of the Versailles humiliation. And, of course, the implementation of the Minsk agreements.

But the task is wider: to build a viable system on the ruins of the present. And without resorting to arms, of course. Probably in the wider Greater Eurasian framework. Russia needs a safe and friendly Western flank in the competition of the future. Europe without Russia or even against it has been rapidly losing its international clout. That was predicted by many people in the 1990s, when Russia offered to integrate with, not in, the continent’s systems. We are too big and proud to be absorbed. Our pitch was rejected then, but there is always a chance it won’t be this time.

That last paragraph is the gist of Russia's real strategic aims. They require to destroy the current system of U.S. hegemony over Europe. Europe will have to be de-NATO-sized. Regime changes in European countries will probably be necessary to see to that.

Russia's leaders now have a once in a century chance to achieve those aims. They will be condemned by their compatriots if the refrain from doing so. The U.S. has no way to prevent or counter a Russian sales boycott and its consequences.

When will European politicians, or those behind them, finally wake up to those facts?

Update (11:45 UTC):

A soundbite from a press conference Lavrov is currently holding:

Russian Embassy, UK @RussianEmbassy – 11:41 UTC · Jun 6, 2022

FM #Lavrov: To all appearances, no one is going to even reform #NATO. They are going to turn this “defensive alliance” into a global alliance claiming global military dominance. This is a dangerous path that is definitely doomed to failure.

Posted by b on June 6, 2022 at 11:24 UTC | Permalink

Comments

A good article. However, I take exception to the use of “fascist” or “Nazi” (neo or otherwise) to describe those who seized power in Ukraine in 2014. Victoria Nuland, in her press conference in Washington, made it clear the US was in charge, at a cost of $5.5 billion. Being one of the neo-crazies wanting Russia to be returned to the tribe’s ownership the fascist/Nazi narrative is straight out of the CIA playbook. Fascists and Nazis were opposed to the international banking cartel. The nut-jobs in Ukraine, including the Azov battalion are serving the interests of that cartel. Nazi symbols? All of the “national” Waffen SS units, from across Europe, had their own insignias. The Germans weren’t requiring volunteers to pass ideology tests on National Socialism in order to fight communists. No one wants to think about the Ukrainians fighting with the Germans to rid themselves of the (((Russians))) who had just starved to death, millions of their family, friends and neighbours.
The irony is that Putin and Russia (with China’s help), like Hitler and Germany, are the ones obstructing the psychopathic globalists from world domination. With any luck, Putin will succeed.

Posted by: Curmudgeon | Jun 8 2022 16:34 utc | 401

Posted by: Rollory | Jun 8 2022 15:03 utc | 398
I’m european.
Gringos have manipulated and stifled every significant political development in my country, always in favor of continuity with local fascism and its designs.
While in turn providing ZERO help with actual territorial conflicts.
I’m not afraid of gringos, I hate them for good historical reasons. And I have good political and material reasons to fear them, but fear won’t help me.
On the other hand, the USSR was one country out of TWO that provided any sort of help against fascism; when every “LiBeRaL dEmOcRaCy” in europe was giggling while watching my country burn at the hands of genocidal fascists.
Not only I don’t have it in me to be such an ungrateful bastard to hate the russians (and other peoples of the USSR), gringos (and others) have acted as nothing short of shaytans towards us.

Posted by: Arganthonios | Jun 8 2022 16:34 utc | 402

@ Mikkael | Jun 8 2022 16:14 utc | 400
thanks mikkael.. that is very nice here..

Posted by: james | Jun 8 2022 16:53 utc | 403

Posted by: Curmudgeon | Jun 8 2022 16:34 utc | 401
Yes, fucking Nazis usually object to be called such, and insist on ridiculous euphemistical epithets.
Post saved for future reference.
Try to keep your nazi fetish a private affair.
BTW, you got a nice Golodomor there, it would be a shame if it was Hearst Press propaganda feat Goebbels.

Posted by: Arganthonios | Jun 8 2022 16:55 utc | 404

Gonzo has risen from the dead! Could have sworn Russia declared this guy dead months ago.

Posted by: shitlib | Jun 8 2022 20:44 utc | 405

Russia can achieve this at any time. It simply has to stop supplying gas and oil to Europe.

It seems simple and easy. But a stick always has two ends.
Yes, Russia can exert significant pressure on hostile countries by cutting off (or significantly reducing) the supply of raw materials. But at the same time, Russia will no longer receive funds that previously (and still) make a significant contribution to the Russian budget. And to find a replacement for the huge and, importantly, solvent European market is a task for the Russian Federation of the same scale and difficulty as it is for the EU to find a replacement for Russian gas/oil. Therefore, it is practically unrealistic – “simply has to stop supplying gas and oil to Europe”.
In addition, Russia is unlikely to agree to “modify” its long-standing and well-deserved image as a proven and reliable supplier that fulfills all contracts in any “geopolitical weather” (the only exception may be open war). If we simply stop supplying gas and oil to the EU, Russia’s other partners will draw certain conclusions about the reliability of the Russians. I do not think that Russia should imitate the manners and practices of the United States, canceling and tearing up any objectionable contracts and agreements. Let this “glory” belong exclusively to the Americans.

It may still hope that European leaders will recognized the deadly game the U.S. is playing with them.
Unfortunately the leaders of Europe are dumb and compromised.

The fundamental misconception is that European leaders can/should realize, or understand, or “discover” something.
The heads of European states (as well as politicians of lower rank) – if not all, then, I believe, the absolute majority – are “agents of influence” of the United States and act in the interests of the United States. Literally. Their task/work/goal is to serve the interests of the United States, not those countries that they are assigned to manage. Therefore, decisions are made that are frankly harmful/dangerous for European countries (but beneficial/convenient for the United States).
It is a mistake to consider European politicians dumb. They are not dumb, they just do their job – satisfying the interests of the boss.

The current ideological leaders of Europe will have to be replaced by clean ones who follow the German tradition of Realpolitik.
Only with new and decent leaders will Europe come to its senses.

Unfortunately, we have to state that all the current European leaders were voluntarily chosen by the population of the respective countries (at least by the majority of the population). A number of leaders were even re-elected. These people didn’t come from Mars. They were put forward, proposed to the population (including on the basis of the aspirations of the population), and the citizens cast their votes.
The replacement of the current European rulers with rational, adequate and responsible ones can take place under two conditions:
1. Restoration of state sovereignty, which implies getting rid of many years of American “guardianship”.
2. Civil demand – if the civil society of European countries clearly expresses its will to have rational, adequate and responsible leaders, then they will be nominated from among the society.
What comes first: point 1 or 2 is a matter of debate.
And yes, I agree that “Russia can help to achieve that”. But, as one can see from recent decades, Russia’s policy is reactionary. Assistance will be provided, but only if the initial request is received. Saving yourself (and the future of your children, grandchildren, descendants) is the task of the current inhabitants of Europe, not Russia. In the same way, Russia itself saved itself in 2000 (note that at that time no one helped her).
I have already written about Germany’s historical chance. It was unaware and missed. So I am also skeptical about the fact that the population will “wake up” and “change power” to an adequate one.
P.S. I express my condolences to the German people in connection with the terrorist act (though not recognized as such) in Berlin. This is a tragedy.

Posted by: alaff | Jun 9 2022 9:55 utc | 406

“Unfortunately, we have to state that all the current European leaders were voluntarily chosen by the population of the respective countries (at least by the majority of the population). A number of leaders were even re-elected. These people didn’t come from Mars. They were put forward, proposed to the population (including on the basis of the aspirations of the population), and the citizens cast their votes.”
Posted by: alaff | Jun 9 2022 9:55 utc | 406
Well, these political figureheads’ campaigns aren’t outwardly predicated on abject subservience to Pindostan and Brusselreich.
They’re usually predicated on domestic matters, on which they later renege as silently as possible – usually on account of the aforementioned doormat attitude, but also simply out of a lack of political will.
The foremost tactic of liberal-democratic electoral campaigns is the bait and switch, given that there is NO democratic accountability or binding-ness [sic] of political program, this is simply a dominant strategy: Tell the electorate whatever the fuck they want to hear, and then do whatever the fuck you want.
When they bother to say “we would like to do this but we can’t”, there isn’t an inch of movement towards creating the conditions necessary to actually do it.
It brings to mind Ned Flanders’ parents: “we tried nothing and it didn’t work”

Posted by: Arganthonios | Jun 9 2022 10:34 utc | 407

Especially since the 90s, US leadership has been corrupt and incompetent. When you have such a lopsided power dynamic as has existed since the end of Cold War (1.0) when the US strode atop of the world as the sole remaining superpower — you don’t have to think strategically,or at least not be particularly good at it. You can just throw your weight around… go from one disastrous campaign to the next and just absorb whatever losses incurred and move on. But as soon as you come up against an opponent that can actually present some kind of resistance — that’s when your decisions have to be more carefully thought out… and when the weakness of your strategic thinking runs the risk of being exposed. It would be analogous to a professional football team whose only opponents had been high school teams. The coaching staff could be totally inept but it wouldn’t be apparent to anyone because you could just keep rolling from one victory to the next — without consequences for your bad decisions. But as soon as you started going up against other pro teams that could actually provide some competition — that’s when you’d see what the coaching staff was really made of. And that’s part of what we’re witnessing now. The Russians can think circles around these fools.. and the idiot neocons are finally being exposed for all to see.

Posted by: Steverino | Jun 9 2022 11:05 utc | 408

I see absolutely no NATO posed threat to Russia.
What do you fear that NATO will do to Russia that has not done in the last 70 years of the preservation of Russia’s border by that very NATO
Before Feb. 24, I saw no value in US NATO membership. I was more suspicious of the Germans than the Russians.
But now, because Russia seems to make no sense in posing the existence of a threat, the evidence for which is not apparent, to itself by NATO, I worry that the US will not be able to and maybe should not leave NATO.
I read that Putin staged nuclear capable Iskander in Kaliningrad over 7 years ago.
So, what possible advantage would NATO derive from destroying Moscow with IRBMs, given an expectation Iskanders will reach capitals too?
Further, you expect that western elites fear privations suffered by their populations, But I suspect Russia will benefit them by taking the blame for doing what those elites plan to do to their people anyway.
Biden is now waging war against the American people, probably in behalf of the CCP and also the WEF. Our biggest question is whether this is incompetence or evil.

Posted by: Christopher Hollins | Jun 10 2022 12:13 utc | 409

It’s only 300 oligarchs who keep the entire World in their stranglehold.

Posted by: Chew Chow | Jun 10 2022 21:56 utc | 410

Russia wants all of Europe as intact as possible and ready to work in Eurasia. Putin shows this in the Ukraine: fully capable of razing it, he chooses not to at the expense of Ru troops’ lives.
The US on the other hand wants Europe destroyed as much as possible to prevent Eurasia.
Overall, the following are solid keys to reading Putin: (1) he always does what he says he will do, (2) he aims to stay within the law. These points are only true for Russian foreign policy, not domestic.

Posted by: EzRussian | Jun 11 2022 17:50 utc | 411

Yes maybe Russian sanctions on Europe would have such an effect, but I highly doubt Russia would impose such sanctions on Europe. Russians are too soft and they love Europe too much. Especially the young ones. The reason we are where we are today is because Russians have a soft spot for Europe and this may be their downfall in the long run.

Posted by: Balkanizer | Jun 12 2022 16:18 utc | 412

The Russians need to de-Americanize Europe because NATO itself is just an American puppet organization.
The American Empire is the military hegemon of NATO.
More importantly, NATO serves the interests of this American Empire and the “Atlanticist” (i.e. pro-American) ruling elites of Europe, who have been carefully selected, indoctrinated, and imposed as leaders of their respective European nations by the Anglo Americans for over 70 years since the end of World War 2.
In fact, the Americans had to engage in coup d’etats and state terrorism in order to create an entire class of pro-American quislings throughout Europe during the Cold War and prevent the rise of Left Wing (or even Conservative) European political parties that would challenge American overlords.
Operation Gladio, the military coup of Greece, the May 1968 regime change op against Charles DeGaulle of France are just a few examples of America’s yoke over Europe.
NATO’s Secret Armies
Operation GLADIO and Terrorism in Western Europe
https://www.routledge.com/NATOs-Secret-Armies-Operation-GLADIO-and-Terrorism-in-Western-Europe/Ganser/p/book/9780714685007
These American regime change operations were justified behind the Big Lie of defending American-style “freedom and democracy”–which in reality is just an Orwellian euphemism for American Empire and its capitalist system.
In fact, American “Freedom and Democracy” are the founding lies of the United States of America since 1776. They are nothing more than the mask of American Empire.

Posted by: ak74 | Jun 12 2022 18:31 utc | 413

“Some ten years from now the U.S. would be able to again try to wage a big (proxy) war against Russia. Then with a decent chance to win.”
What about China – would it sit idly by ?

Posted by: Johannes | Jun 12 2022 19:10 utc | 414

@114 sailing by
Beg to differ. We have a movement in France called NUPES that has mobilised working people around anti-capitalist, anti-neoliberal principles. Don’t put the kiss of death on us. Don”t listen to the sterile sectarians who call us “pseudo-left.” The struggle will be hard enough against the financiers’ media and the toxic EU. Vive le peuple. Vive le travail. L’humanité vaincra. La Raison tonne.

Posted by: Gene Poole | Jun 13 2022 19:17 utc | 415

Posted by: Gene Poole | Jun 13 2022 19:18 utc | 416

Posted by: Gene Poole | Jun 13 2022 19:18 utc | 417

Quite a group of commenters at Moon of Alabama. America will soon be a fourth world nation. OK if you say so. European nations are powerless. Russia is the world’s super economy. How come they are so backward or are they just cleverly faking incompetence. Russian military forces are omnipotent. They could effortlessly conquer all of the west. They weren’t so impressive fighting the poorest country in Europe but that was probably Putin’s 4 dimensional chess, deceiving enemies about Russia’s hidden great powers. I suppose we will all be speaking Russian in no time. Meanwhile I’ll bet on the US.

Posted by: Patricus | Jun 26 2022 1:11 utc | 418

Back to Main