US politics - the new orange wave (Part 7)

[mrjez]

@CJohns

No Trump is working on an economic and resources deal with Russia… and to get it over the line he needs Ukraine to go away… anyway he sees fit.

Pay closer attn and talks will be about a huge energy deal between Russia and US relating to the whole Artic northern region and that then will follow pressure on Canada and Greenlands sovereignty in the area

Ukraine War is just an inconvenience Trumps wants to get rid of for a bigger picture… that wont end well for the globe

[Lawry]

@bigallan

As I understand it, the EU Common Security Defence Policy does not accord the EU institutional power to commandeer national Military to form an EU army. EU members have not ceded that power, as compared to cooperation .
It is different from NATO treaty rights and obligations.

Here it is @bigallan. Read below. It refers to all EU members having an obligation to aid and assist by ALL means in their power. So if Ukraine got its wish to join the EU in February 2022 then the other EU members would have been obliged to aid and assist by all means - which of course would include troops , weapons and aid. This defence clause is binding on all members of the EU and it explicitly states it’s consistent with commitments of countries that are NATO members.

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/EN/legal-content/glossary/mutual-defence-clause.html

Mutual defence clause

The Treaty of Lisbon strengthens the solidarity between European Union (EU) Member States in dealing with external threats by introducing a mutual defence clause (Article 42(7) of the Treaty on European Union). This clause provides that if a Member State is the victim of armed aggression on its territory, the other Member States have an obligation to aid and assist it by all the means in their power, in accordance with Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations.

This obligation of mutual defence is binding on all Member States. However, it does not affect the neutrality of certain Member States and is consistent with the commitments of countries that are NATO members.

[Crazy_Bomber]

Must say the Trump/Ukraine situation has been very concerning.

[bigallan]

EU treaty does not place a binding obligation to engage in combat in supporting a member facing aggression.
Rights and obligations aren’t the same.

[PH_WARFRadio]

“aid and assist by all means in its power” is very open to interpretation.

Could mean supplying weapons, food or finance.

Could mean troops ready in a denfensive position on its own country’s border (i.e. Danish troops in standby mode in Demark, but not yet ready to engage in Ukraine).

[Lawry]

I’m confused it says an obligation to aid and assist using all means? I would think that means troops and combat ? Isn’t that what all means is?

Given that obligation it’s unlikely the EU would not have come to the aid of Ukraine with troops and combats personnel if Ukraine had become a member of the EU.

[CJohns]

There it is

"Russia and the United States discussed possible cooperation on energy projects in the Arctic at a meeting in Saudi Arabia Tuesday, a top Russian negotiator told POLITICO.

Kirill Dmitriev, who heads the state-owned Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF), said the economic conversations had been about broad strokes, but that the two sides had discussed some “specific areas of cooperation.”

“It was more a general discussion — maybe joint projects in the Arctic. We specifically discussed the Arctic,” Dmitriev said by phone as he boarded a flight home after the talks in Riyadh"

[Odoyle]

@Lawry

Isn’t that what all means is?

The nation providing aid gets to determine what ‘means’ they can provide.

That may be extremely limited and influenced by a number of factors.

[Loflyer]

It’s just going to be awful thing after awful thing for years. We needed to start turning the ship around a couple of decades ago, now there’s a filthy old jet engine strapped to the back of it.

[Lawry]

Yes but it would have placed a much stronger obligation on the EU to help. Much stronger response to Putin.

At the time I think it was reported Putin feared Ukraine potentially becoming part of the EU in the same way or similar way as he feared Ukraine joining NATO.

[Odoyle]

@Lawry

Yes but it would have placed a much stronger obligation on the EU to help.

It’s pretty flimsy, I wouldn’t be relying on it at all.

EU signals economic cooperation, which Putin naturally feared as it would shift Ukraine closer future NATO membership.

Thats why NATO has held more weight in terms of collective defence, and is designed accordingly.

[Lawry]

It says all means in their power. If an EU member has an army - that would fall within ‘all means in their power’. It doesn’t say some means it says all means within their power.

That isn’t flimsy - it’s clear on those obligations. The member countries are obligated to use all means in its power. It can’t be anymore than all means in your power because that’s everything - the whole lot.

[Odoyle]

@Lawry

If an EU member has an army - that would fall within ‘all means in their power’.

Not at all. They may not be in a position to deploy their military, they may not be in a position to sustain a deployment, they have domestic pressures, they may have their own strategic challenges. ‘Their power’ opens up a lot of complexity.

What a nation can effectively deploy might be extremely limited.

The level of ‘all means’ is actually very vague.

[Nexta]

@Lawry

Connotation:

Reality

EPRS_ATA(2022)739250_EN.pdf

[Lawry]

Well that’s your interpretation- if a country isn’t in control of its own army that country has bigger issues. All means in its power seems straightforward to me. In any case they’re are 27 EU members, the chances of all 27 members not being in control of their own armies would seem an absurd proposition.

[Odoyle]

@Lawry

Well that’s your interpretation- if a country isn’t in control of its own army that country has bigger issues.

No, it’s just the nature of a military deployment. It has nothing to do with ‘controlling the army’ whatever that references.

It is entirely to do with what a nation can feasibly deploy, rotate, support and maintain.

[Lawry]

@Nexta if the EU had granted Ukraine emergency membership of the EU after Russia attacked in February 2022 as Zelenskyy pleaded for, do you think there would have been a much stronger united response to Putin? If not what security benefits does the EU provide?

[Loflyer]

That Pixies song, what was it, ‘Wave of Redirection’? Something like that. Good band

[Nexta]

Perhaps. Hard to say what could have happened - then we enter the world of speculative/alternative-history fiction. But once the US decided that defeat was a foregone conclusion and left Ukraine to hang out to dry (remember they gave Ukraine 72hrs) then the Europeans followed suit.

[Lawry]

Wwwk there was also a band called

Neurotic axxxholes have you listened to them lately?