Europe’s clever war plan

Dmitry Orlov

Europe’s leaders are busily hatching plans for remilitarization, getting ready for the Russians to attack, which happens to be something that the Russians, most insultingly, have no intention of doing. But that’s just the same; if the Russians don’t want to attack Europe, perhaps Europe can attack Russia instead? Does that seem like a spectacularly dumb idea? Well, perhaps it does, but even such a high level of stupidity is hardly enough to derail Europe’s remilitarization project. It would take more than mere stupidity: a lack of money, perhaps, or a lack of industrial capacity.

In any case, the plan of the European elites is as follows:

1. Spend lots of borrowed money on useless weapons systems, pocket part of that money and park it offshore.
2. Provoke Russia into starting a war by genociding Russian populations in any locations where they are concentrated in large numbers (Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Transnistria, Cyprus; Russia itself).
3. Suffer a humiliating defeat and declare unconditional surrender.
4. Flee to a tropical paradise and enjoy their ill-gotten wealth, leaving the Russians to attempt to mitigate the ensuing humanitarian disaster.

If ever this plan doesn’t seem sufficiently brilliant to Europe’s leaders, all that means is that it’s time to up the dose of cocaine. This magic substance can make even the dullest former banker, trade union functionary or lady-gynecologist seem (to him/herself) as a brilliant military strategist.

The entire EU apparatus in Brussels is betting on war — and not for victory, but for profit. And not so much for profit in the traditional sense of making something useful and selling it profitably, but in the sense of scaring the public using phantom threats, running up public debt and pocketing some of it. The European military-industrial complex, stuffed with politicians’ friends and relatives, requires money. Unfortunately, to make that money flow requires some blood to flow as well.

The price of the question at the moment stands at around 800 billion euros — but that’s only in the near future; in the longer term, the sky is the limit. France alone is planning to allocate 431 billion euros for the needs of its army next year, which happens to be more than Russia’s entire military budget. Note the difference, however: Russia is fighting and winning a major land war while France doesn’t even have a fighting force it could field except for the rather tiny Foreign Legion. But it does have quite a few money-grubbing military bureaucrats.

You might think that I am somehow prejudiced against France, so here are some dry facts. France is not officially at war. It is not conducting any military operations anywhere (training exercises don’t count). It does not participate in armed conflicts anywhere in the world (French mercenaries don’t count). Then why does it need 431 billion euros’ worth of weapons?

The answer is both frightening and hilarious at the same time: the French are preparing to go to war against Russia. They are even mentioning some specific numbers: they imagine that they might need 50 thousand soldiers. They imagine that Britain and Germany will join their coalition of voluntary interventionists, adding up to a mighty army of at least 100-150 thousand European souls disporting themselves on the ground somewhere in the former Ukraine, daring the Russians to drive them out — which the Russians are prepared to do quite readily. Roughly half of them would depart in body bags, the rest bandaged up and contused. In dealing with European forces, the Russians would not hold back, as they do with the Ukrainians, whom they see as mentally ill, violent family members and try to treat gently.

Ignoring that inevitable eventuality, the European leaders imagine deploying tanks (which would have to keep well away from Russian positions because the Russians would blow them up using, for instance, Lancet drones as soon as they are spotted and within range). They also imagine deploying fighter jets to control the sky over the former Ukraine (ignoring the fact that the Russians would, once again, blow them out of the air as soon as they are within range). There may also be some frigates (illegal in the Black Sea under the Montreaux Convention of 1936).

If these plans seem a bit sketchy, then that’s because they are. I am not an expert on military matters, but the last three years of observing continuous military action on the Ukrainian front has perhaps taught me more than the European officials in charge of military policy seem able to grasp. Take Macron, for instance, who is, unfortunately, never at a loss for words: he openly declares his intention to take control of the land, sky and sea in and around the former Ukraine. It is as if the Russian forces don’t exist. What is that, willful ignorance or hysterical blindness?

Meanwhile, Monsieur Lecornu seems a bit more at home with reality and honestly admits: Russia takes control of several hundred square kilometers every month and will come to control Western Ukraine once the Kiev regime collapses. This implies that there will be no formerly Ukrainian territory left for Macron’s mighty forces to control. Do these two talk to each other? Perhaps they are so full of themselves that they can talk but can’t listen…

They do seem to agree on a common bit of ideology, synthesized into a basic formula: “the demilitarization of Ukraine is unacceptable in principle.” This is no longer even a veiled threat; it is a casus belli — a reason, a justification, a pretext for war. Anything can serve as the formal trigger: an accidental explosion, a staged provocation, even some imaginary incident trumpeted by Europe’s fake news media. The important point is that the political decision to intervene militarily seems to have already been made — and not for any strategic reason but purely out of greed. Everyone who is close to the defense contracts makes money on war. Europe no longer hides its motivations. It is willing to sell the death of its citizens in exchange for kickbacks and other forms of grift.

Will it ever come to a real, hot war? This is by no means certain. But the logic of events and the level of nervous hysteria in Western capitals indicate that they want to glue their broken world order back together by borrowing close to a trillion euros and throwing it at the defense contractors. The logic of this action will then require tens of thousands of their citizens to be sent to places where they will be maimed or killed — all for the sake of staying in power and personal self-enrichment.

This problem begs for a political solution. The question is, is such a solution even possible given the degenerate state of European politics? Yes, AfD is now the majority party in Germany (by a slim margin); but it is still being kept out of power. Such shifts may imply something significant, or they may signify nothing. So far, they are not preventing popularly detested nonentities such as Macron, Merz and Starmer from conspiring to take Europe to war against Russia.<

The best scenario imaginable is that their attempt to borrow a trillion euros will fail (for instance, because the US Federal Reserve, fearful of triggering a hyperinflationary spiral, will refuse to print a corresponding amount of dollars); or that their rearmament program will fail (because there isn’t enough of an industrial base left in Europe); or that their attempts to hold on to power will fail (because the Europeans will somehow generate enough brainpower to vote them out). This last bit — where the Europeans have to actually do something to save themselves — is admittedly the hardest to imagine.

What is easiest to imagine is that Russia will once again rise to the occasion and neutralize the military threat coming from Europe, as it had done with the Teutonic Knights, the Swedes, the Poles, the French and the Germans. What is different this time is that Russia is now at its strongest and supremely well prepared to execute this task. But this task is an onerous one, and this time around the Russians may decide to make sure that Europe never poses a threat to Russia again, refashioning it into a collection of demilitarized, deindustrialized ethnic enclaves. After all, who said that demilitarization and denazification is just for the Ukrainians? But perhaps the Russians won’t have to do this; after all, that seems to be the direction in which Europe is heading in any case.

[…]

Via https://boosty.to/cluborlov/posts/6618eb1b-fc2e-4b39-8801-9f8d065dad6c