Avtor članka v Foreign Policy je nekdanji zunanji minister Litve, kar samo govori o tem, v kakšnem paralelnem svetu, popolnoma ločenem od realnosti, živi del evropske politike. Na drugi strani pa tudi, s kako slabimi analitiki imamo opravka. Če evropska politika operira s tovrstnimi “analizami”, potem je seveda absolutno jasno, zakaj je EU danes na tem stranskem tiru, na katerem se je znašla.

Why China Cannot Play “Kissinger” With Europe, using Russia to peel Europe from the US

The recent Foreign Policy article suggests Beijing missed a “Kissinger moment” by siding with Moscow instead of prying Europe away from Washington. This framing reflects a persistent Western illusion: that China can treat Russia as a disposable pawn in a balance-of-power game. In reality, China’s partnership with Russia is not a tactical choice but a structural necessity dictated by geography, resources, and the future of Eurasian integration.

Geography Matters: America vs. China

The United States enjoys the luxury of two oceans and two meek neighbors. This insulation allows Washington to gamble abroad without fear of destabilizing its homeland. China, by contrast, shares a vast border with Russia — a nuclear power and resource giant. Undermining Russia would destabilize China’s northern frontier, invite insecurity along thousands of kilometers of border, and expose Beijing to encirclement by the U.S. and its allies. For China, Russia is not a distant chess piece but a neighbor whose stability is inseparable from its own.

Russia as China’s Strategic Lifeline

Russia provides China with discounted energy, minerals, and food security. These flows are not optional luxuries; they are the backbone of China’s resilience against Western sanctions and maritime blockades. Severing ties with Moscow would force China to rely on sea lanes dominated by the U.S. Navy, leaving Beijing vulnerable to coercion. In addition, Russia’s Arctic coastline grants China access to the Northern Sea Route — a strategic corridor that shortens shipping to Europe and bypasses U.S.-controlled chokepoints. No Kissinger-style maneuver could compensate for the loss of this lifeline.

Nadaljujte z branjem→

S tem vprašanjem se ubadam že nekaj časa. Prišel sem do sklepa, da evropski interes po nadaljevanju vojne v Ukrajini in potenciranju strahu pred namišljeno grožnjo ruskega napada na Evropo temelji predvsem na strahu, da bi se v primeru miru ZDA pod Trumpom utegnile umakniti iz Evrope. Ven iz Nata. Proti Aziji, kjer se nahaja edini pravi konkurent Amerike za globalno dominacijo – Kitajska. Evropski politiki želijo ohraniti ZDA v Evropi zato, ker brez ameriške prisotnosti privid evropske moči in superiornosti razpade na koščke. Kakšno moč pa ima Evropa brez ameriških jedrskih raket? Brez ameriške vojaške podpore razpade vsa povojna fantazma glede EU kot globalne velesile. Brez ameriških raket v Evropi bi se morala EU na novo definirati kot vojaška sila. Kar pa je v tem nacionalnem miksu in institucionalni karikaturi EU-27 neizvedljivo. Zato se bodo evropske države do bridkega konca oklepale nadaljevanja vojne v Ukrajini in izpodbijale vsakršno možnost mirne rešitve vojne, ki ne vključuje popolnega poraza Rusije. Ker slednje ni možno, bodo evropske države pobijale vse mirovne pobude.

Evropske države nimajo strategije za mir v Ukrajini. Nimajo je niti za vojno. Želijo le, da se ta ne neha in da ne razpade fantazma Evrope kot velesile. Mirno rešitev vojne v Ukrajini vidijo kot simbolno kapitulacijo pred realnostjo, da se globalni red ne vrti več okoli Evrope.

Do podobnega sklepa je prišla Almut Rochowanski v (levičarskem, vendar dobrem) The Jacobian, ki pravi – če povzamem v enem stavku – da evropske elite vztrajajo pri vojni ne zaradi strahu pred ruskim napadom, temveč zaradi strahu pred izgubo lastnega globalnega statusa.

Spodaj je povzetek njenega (sicer zelo dolgega) eseja, generiran s pomočjo UI in mojega editiranja sloga.

Evropska politika se je po dveh letih vojne v Ukrajini znašla v paradoksalnem položaju: kljub utrujenosti javnosti, gospodarski škodi in nenehni politični napetosti se zdi, da evropski voditelji raje vzdržujejo stanje vojne, kot da bi iskali možnosti za mir. Rochowanska opozarja, da se je v evropskem političnem prostoru utrdilo prepričanje, da bi bila “hitro dosežena” mirna rešitev celo nevarna ali neprimerna, medtem ko se militarizacija ter govor o neizogibnem spopadu z Rusijo normalizirata. Vzporedno pa evropske elite kažejo izrazito nezaupanje do kakršnekoli pobude, ki ne prihaja iz njihovega kroga, kar se je drastično pokazalo ob ameriški mirovni pobudi, ki je Evropo ujela povsem nepripravljeno.

Ko je novica o ameriški mirovni iniciativi prišla v javnost, so evropski voditelji pokazali predvsem šok in tiho nezadovoljstvo – ne zaradi vsebine pobude, temveč zato, ker pri njej niso sodelovali. Še bolj boleča je bila izjava ameriškega uradnika, da jim “ni mar za Evropo v tej zadevi“, kar je razgalilo globoko asimetrijo moči v transatlantskih odnosih.

Nadaljujte z branjem→

Drama in panika:

HE END OF NATO AS WE KNEW IT

Tomorrow, December 3, NATO foreign ministers gather in Brussels.

America’s seat will be empty.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio is skipping the summit. First time in over two decades a U.S. Secretary of State has refused to attend.

But here is what no one is telling you:

Today, December 2, Trump’s envoy Steve Witkoff meets Vladimir Putin in Moscow.

Read that again.

The day before NATO convenes to discuss European security, America is in Moscow negotiating directly with Russia. Without Europe. Without consultation. Without permission.

Who is Washington sending to Brussels instead? Deputy Secretary Christopher Landau. The same official who wrote “NATO is still a solution in search of a problem” before deleting the post.

The message could not be clearer.

Since 1949, NATO operated on one principle: collective decision-making. Thirty-two nations, one voice.

That architecture died this week.

The new hierarchy:

Track One: Washington and Moscow decide.

Track Two: Washington informs Kyiv.

Track Three: Europe learns what was agreed.

European diplomats are already complaining they have been “cut out” of Ukraine negotiations. The leaked 28-point peace plan was drafted by American and Russian negotiators. Brussels was not consulted.

America funds approximately 70% of NATO’s operational capacity. He who pays, dictates.

What happens next will define the next fifty years of global order.

Either Europe accepts its new role as a funding mechanism for American-designed security arrangements.

Or the Atlantic fractures.

There is no third option.

The post-1945 world order is being rewritten.

Not in Brussels.

In Moscow.

While NATO ministers wait in an empty room.

Vir

Realnost:

No. 1: ZDA pokrivajo skoraj 70 % vojaških izdatkov Nata. Torej v Natu in o Natu odločajo v Washingtonu. Če želijo EU države več glasovalnih pravic, morajo ne samo plačati več kot ZDA, pač pa tudi operativno prevzeti vodenje Nata (ne zgolj prek ameriške lutke iz EU na mestu generalnega sekretarja zveze)

No. 2. EU se je sama izločila iz pogajanj z Rusijo, ker se z njo sploh ni želela in se ne želi pogovarjati. Če se ne želiš pogovarjati z nasprotno stranjo, pač ne moreš jokati, da te ni za pogajalsko mizo.

The European Central Bank has refused to backstop a €140bn payment to Ukraine, dealing a blow to an EU plan to raise a “reparations loan” backed by frozen Russian assets.

The ECB concluded that the European Commission proposal violated its mandate, according to multiple officials, adding to Brussels’ difficulties in raising the giant loan against Russian central bank assets immobilised at Euroclear, the Belgian securities depository.

It comes amid pressure on the EU to finance Ukraine for the next two years, as Kyiv faces a cash crunch amid a renewed Russian military onslaught and a US peace initiative.

Under the European Commission plan, EU countries would provide state guarantees to ensure the repayment risk on the €140bn loan to Ukraine is shared.

But commission officials said the countries would not be able to raise the cash rapidly in an emergency, and this could put markets under pressure.

The officials asked the ECB whether it could act as a lender of last resort to Euroclear Bank, the lending arm of the Belgian institution, to avoid a liquidity crisis, according to four people briefed on the discussions.

ECB officials told the commission this was impossible, three of these people said.

The ECB’s internal analysis concluded that the commission proposal was equivalent to providing direct funding to governments, as the central bank would cover the financial obligations of member states.

This practice, called “monetary financing” by economists, is banned in EU treaties because of evidence it results in high inflation and loss of central bank credibility.

The ECB said “such a proposal is not under consideration as it would likely violate EU treaty law prohibiting monetary financing”.

Vir: Financial Times

Čez vikend so se na tviterju (X) pojavile špekulativne teorije o tem, da naj bi evropske države načrtovale silovit povračilni udarec ZDA  zaradi Trumpovega barantanja s Putinom glede priznanja osvojenega ozemlja v Ukrajini v korist Rusije (glejte spodaj enega izmed teh zapisov). EU države naj bi se odzvale tako, da bi začele pospešeno prodajati ameriške državne obveznice (UST) in s tem povzročile velik dvig zahtevanih donosov na ameriške obveznice ter posledično poslale ameriško gospodarstvo v recesijo. 

Ta špekulacija  je ena najbolj bizarnih in butastih teorij. Iz nekaj preprostih razlogov.

Njegova muzika ni (bila) skladna z mojim glasbenim okusom. Toda njegova dobrodelnost me je presunila.

He died on Christmas morning, and only then did the world discover the truth: he had been secretly giving away millions with one rule:

No one could ever know it was him.

December 25, 2016. 

George Michael, one of the defining pop icons of the 1980s and 1990s, was found dead at age 53. The world mourned the voice behind Faith, Careless Whisper, and Freedom. Tributes flowed, celebrating his talent, his cultural impact, his brilliance.

But then, quietly, another story began to emerge.

Not about his concerts. 

Not about his fame. 

But about his kindness.

One by one, strangers stepped forward with memories that had never made headlines: stories of compassion, generosity, and life-changing gifts from a man who made them swear to silence.

Nadaljujte z branjem→