I agree with your analysis and in some ways the conclusions, so eloquently put, are obvious. Why then would a commissioned paper see it differently. Two reasons come to mind:
1. It was intended to distract American/Russian “think tanks” into believing Europeans have not realised the US ally tide has turned.
2. The authors genuinely think appealing to Trump’s better nature is worthwhile.
My hope is, it is 1. We need time to build our defence and technology capabilities to displace US dependence. Therefore a bit of distraction and feigned appeasement is worthwhile.
My fear is that it is 2. Our policy thinkers are stuck in the past and not able to accept the way things are now.
My belief is that Europe must stand and act independently against economic and territorial aggressors both east and west of us. We have some considerable distance to go to get there, but realising it must come is an important step.
My humble (occasionally anyhow) opinion is that the “Best Practices” lesson to be gained from this is to forego the policies that wait for whatever absurdity the Trumpers choose to inflict upon allies and proactively and continuously apply pressure to US Digital Services “Providers” (extortionists) via full or continually graduated implementation of ACI style implements.
Sure, there are other routes that can bring pain, though nothing gets Trump’s enablers’ attention quicker than to yank the rug out on their world domination plans.
The Greenland thing was, among the basket of corrupt motivations inherent in any Trump administration action, an attempt to get Europe to retaliate in the form of evicting US forces from EU bases. Trump has tried this maneuver in both his first and second terms. Despite the collection of sycophantic comic book villains that he assembled to wither any resistance in his second term, there’s still forces to pushback against the abandonment of US NATO presence in Europe.
Do not assume that the military simply salute and comply with any action the Trumpers dictate. Especially post Quantico.
Good analysis. These are important points.
I get really tired of the resistance patting themselves on the back and declaring victory following every minor capitulation by the Trump regime.
It’s not a victory to inconvenience an abuser to the degree that they forego one route of attack simply to focus on another.
They must lose something substantial as a result of their initial attack, or they will have learned nothing.
Greenland is an eight foot tall bunny rabbit that Trump carries around in his watch pocket. He starts talking about Greenland when things get uncomfortable.
Greenland is a very large piece of ‘jewelry’ with large potential benefits for people like Trump seeking world domination. The fact that it is owned by another country seems to be of limited importance to him (reminding me of Hitler and other wannabe world dominators). It is in our interest to support Denmark in opposing any attempt to seize its territory, as we could become a target next.
Good analysis. Specifically, I think the EU and Great Britain putting troops on the ground on the regular made the current regime give it another think.
Good article, but still have a lingering suspicion that Greenland was just another instance of Trump and his cronies engaging market mnaipulation and we will see continuous rounds of this for the next 3 years
I do believe that Canada’s actions also follow in line with your summation. We , under our current Prime Minister, have reacted by seeking out trade and defence agreements with new partners and reconfirming or enhancing existing trade and defence agreements with established partners. By exercising our power of purchase through boycott we have financially strained (especially tourism) sectors of US economy. By negotiating or renewing defence pacts with the European Union we have lessened US dependence for procurement while simultaneously stimulating our manufacturing sector by re-igniting our defence industry.
We have not shut out US. Rather we have relinquished our dependency and will further more view US as ‘yet another option’ rather than ‘the most important option’. We have shown by our actions that we take Washington seriously when they say they ‘want nothing from Canada’ and that they want ‘no country to depend on USA for their security’.
We don’t need to argue or fight. We would much rather act upon the message delivered in a way that is beneficial to our national well being. Having said that, Canada has and will never back down once threatened. We are stubborn and persistent. We acknowledge that nothing worth doing is not without sacrifice. We are ready, willing and able to work through adversity. We are not indestructible but we are able incur a cost for an aggressor that may be unaffordable.
We are also the best friend you could ever have. We will let you know when we are in disagreement but we will never abandon you.
Trump craves dominance and grandeur. He reminds me of the Kipling story and John Huston movie “The Man Who Would Be King”. He would have loved to be known as the conquerer of Greenland. He only backed off because he ran into a lot of resistance and it became clear that the price of actually invading would be too high.
While the US has cooled the rhetoric on Greenland, it is clear that the US Administration has not changed policy towards Europe and other “allied” countries. The recent Munich conference saw a number of members of the Administration tell Europe what was expected of them as if sovereignty didn’t matter.
It is only a matter of time before more threats re made to Western countries and the US continues with military operations, probably the next one will be Iran and I hope that allies sit on their hands and let the US deal with the mess when things go sideways and the powder keg explodes in the Middle-East.
I don’t agree. Trump was getting pressure back home.. lots of it. Americans were appalled at the bullying - and both Dem & republican legislators were ready to impeach over it. The Europeans didn’t just say they didn’t like it. For the first time the pushback was agressive and definitive. No coddling. The lesson is European leaders must shift tactics - not the usual diplomacy - a more in your face powerful rebuke of trumps aggression is what works.
Totally agree. It is also certainly not to Rutte’s credit. He was merely the guy at the table and the one that Trump likes because of his pathetic behavior.
It's not just TACO. It's not just "short attention span theater" (though there's some of that - the US news cycle runs quickly). It's a lot of what is described in this essay.
The lesson is what the Canadians have been preaching for months (and which the Europeans have been down-playing): Trump (and by consequence, the US) cannot be trusted. Not trusted to do the right thing. Not trusted to do the rational thing. Not trusted to include a "special relationship" in the equation. Not even trusted to act in the US's own interest. Trump follows the "make some shit up and follow your gut" principle. He dies whatever he thinks is in _his_ interest, _at that moment_
"The US ten-year Treasury yields started rising, reaching their highest level since September."
This sounds like it was a natural phenomenon, but what actually happened is that Europe and Canada, together among the largest holders of US government debt, slowly but surely started to dump US treasury bonds, and as a result the rates went up.
If your neighbours are financing a big part of your debt, you should not antagonize them, but be kind to them.
This was only a small demo. But this tool can be used any time again.
As Lyndon Johnson once said: 'if you got them by the balls, their hearts and minds will follow.'
I agree with your analysis and in some ways the conclusions, so eloquently put, are obvious. Why then would a commissioned paper see it differently. Two reasons come to mind:
1. It was intended to distract American/Russian “think tanks” into believing Europeans have not realised the US ally tide has turned.
2. The authors genuinely think appealing to Trump’s better nature is worthwhile.
My hope is, it is 1. We need time to build our defence and technology capabilities to displace US dependence. Therefore a bit of distraction and feigned appeasement is worthwhile.
My fear is that it is 2. Our policy thinkers are stuck in the past and not able to accept the way things are now.
My belief is that Europe must stand and act independently against economic and territorial aggressors both east and west of us. We have some considerable distance to go to get there, but realising it must come is an important step.
My humble (occasionally anyhow) opinion is that the “Best Practices” lesson to be gained from this is to forego the policies that wait for whatever absurdity the Trumpers choose to inflict upon allies and proactively and continuously apply pressure to US Digital Services “Providers” (extortionists) via full or continually graduated implementation of ACI style implements.
Sure, there are other routes that can bring pain, though nothing gets Trump’s enablers’ attention quicker than to yank the rug out on their world domination plans.
The Greenland thing was, among the basket of corrupt motivations inherent in any Trump administration action, an attempt to get Europe to retaliate in the form of evicting US forces from EU bases. Trump has tried this maneuver in both his first and second terms. Despite the collection of sycophantic comic book villains that he assembled to wither any resistance in his second term, there’s still forces to pushback against the abandonment of US NATO presence in Europe.
Do not assume that the military simply salute and comply with any action the Trumpers dictate. Especially post Quantico.
Good analysis. These are important points.
I get really tired of the resistance patting themselves on the back and declaring victory following every minor capitulation by the Trump regime.
It’s not a victory to inconvenience an abuser to the degree that they forego one route of attack simply to focus on another.
They must lose something substantial as a result of their initial attack, or they will have learned nothing.
All the best.
Greenland is an eight foot tall bunny rabbit that Trump carries around in his watch pocket. He starts talking about Greenland when things get uncomfortable.
Greenland is a very large piece of ‘jewelry’ with large potential benefits for people like Trump seeking world domination. The fact that it is owned by another country seems to be of limited importance to him (reminding me of Hitler and other wannabe world dominators). It is in our interest to support Denmark in opposing any attempt to seize its territory, as we could become a target next.
Good analysis. Specifically, I think the EU and Great Britain putting troops on the ground on the regular made the current regime give it another think.
Good article, but still have a lingering suspicion that Greenland was just another instance of Trump and his cronies engaging market mnaipulation and we will see continuous rounds of this for the next 3 years
I do believe that Canada’s actions also follow in line with your summation. We , under our current Prime Minister, have reacted by seeking out trade and defence agreements with new partners and reconfirming or enhancing existing trade and defence agreements with established partners. By exercising our power of purchase through boycott we have financially strained (especially tourism) sectors of US economy. By negotiating or renewing defence pacts with the European Union we have lessened US dependence for procurement while simultaneously stimulating our manufacturing sector by re-igniting our defence industry.
We have not shut out US. Rather we have relinquished our dependency and will further more view US as ‘yet another option’ rather than ‘the most important option’. We have shown by our actions that we take Washington seriously when they say they ‘want nothing from Canada’ and that they want ‘no country to depend on USA for their security’.
We don’t need to argue or fight. We would much rather act upon the message delivered in a way that is beneficial to our national well being. Having said that, Canada has and will never back down once threatened. We are stubborn and persistent. We acknowledge that nothing worth doing is not without sacrifice. We are ready, willing and able to work through adversity. We are not indestructible but we are able incur a cost for an aggressor that may be unaffordable.
We are also the best friend you could ever have. We will let you know when we are in disagreement but we will never abandon you.
Indeed! Great post! ✌️🇨🇦
Short version, TACO.
Trump craves dominance and grandeur. He reminds me of the Kipling story and John Huston movie “The Man Who Would Be King”. He would have loved to be known as the conquerer of Greenland. He only backed off because he ran into a lot of resistance and it became clear that the price of actually invading would be too high.
While the US has cooled the rhetoric on Greenland, it is clear that the US Administration has not changed policy towards Europe and other “allied” countries. The recent Munich conference saw a number of members of the Administration tell Europe what was expected of them as if sovereignty didn’t matter.
It is only a matter of time before more threats re made to Western countries and the US continues with military operations, probably the next one will be Iran and I hope that allies sit on their hands and let the US deal with the mess when things go sideways and the powder keg explodes in the Middle-East.
He is not to be trusted, nor any of his minions!
I don’t agree. Trump was getting pressure back home.. lots of it. Americans were appalled at the bullying - and both Dem & republican legislators were ready to impeach over it. The Europeans didn’t just say they didn’t like it. For the first time the pushback was agressive and definitive. No coddling. The lesson is European leaders must shift tactics - not the usual diplomacy - a more in your face powerful rebuke of trumps aggression is what works.
Speak adroitly and carry the prospect of a black swan; you will go far.
Totally agree. It is also certainly not to Rutte’s credit. He was merely the guy at the table and the one that Trump likes because of his pathetic behavior.
Time for the rest of the world to ignore US drug patents and film copyrights and stop paying royalties.
It's not just TACO. It's not just "short attention span theater" (though there's some of that - the US news cycle runs quickly). It's a lot of what is described in this essay.
The lesson is what the Canadians have been preaching for months (and which the Europeans have been down-playing): Trump (and by consequence, the US) cannot be trusted. Not trusted to do the right thing. Not trusted to do the rational thing. Not trusted to include a "special relationship" in the equation. Not even trusted to act in the US's own interest. Trump follows the "make some shit up and follow your gut" principle. He dies whatever he thinks is in _his_ interest, _at that moment_
Like any fascist Russian, Trump understands violence, coercion and power.
"The US ten-year Treasury yields started rising, reaching their highest level since September."
This sounds like it was a natural phenomenon, but what actually happened is that Europe and Canada, together among the largest holders of US government debt, slowly but surely started to dump US treasury bonds, and as a result the rates went up.
If your neighbours are financing a big part of your debt, you should not antagonize them, but be kind to them.
This was only a small demo. But this tool can be used any time again.
As Lyndon Johnson once said: 'if you got them by the balls, their hearts and minds will follow.'
Did NATO spending commitments increase?