Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Wednesday November 07 2018, @09:37AM   Printer-friendly
from the who's-da-boss? dept.

France's Macron Calls for Creating a 'European Army'

French President Emmanuel Macron called for the creation of a "true European army," issuing a sharp critique of trans-Atlantic security ties days before U.S. President Trump is due to visit France.

Europe's security ties with the U.S., which have been a bedrock of the continent's stability for decades, have come under strain as Mr. Trump has demanded more military spending from European members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and questioned the alliance's benefits for the U.S. Such tensions have led Mr. Macron and German Chancellor Angela Merkel to publicly question whether the continent can still rely on the U.S. to come to Europe's defense.

Mr. Macron went a step further by grouping the U.S. among foreign powers he considers a potential threat to the continent. "We have to protect ourselves with respect to China, Russia and even the United States of America," Mr. Macron said on French radio.

Mr. Macron made the remarks as part of a weeklong tour of World War I battlefields ahead of the centenary of the Nov. 11 Armistice, when the French leader is due to host Mr. Trump, Vladimir Putin of Russia and many other heads of state.

Also at Newsweek.

Emmanuel Macron: Six held in 'attack' plot against French president

Six people have been arrested in France on suspicion of planning to carry out a "violent" attack on President Emmanuel Macron, officials say. The individuals, reported to be five men and a woman, were picked up by the French security services in Brittany, north-east and south-east France.

An investigation is now taking place into a "criminal terrorist association", a judicial source said. Details of the suspects and the alleged plot have not yet been released.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Thexalon on Wednesday November 07 2018, @06:01PM (5 children)

    by Thexalon (636) on Wednesday November 07 2018, @06:01PM (#759069)

    The EU's major military threat is the Russians. Trump is very friendly with the Russkies, George W Bush was not. Hence it's perfectly reasonable for the EU to consider Trump less reliable than Bush as far as coming to their aid should trouble start.

    By the numbers, on paper, the Europeans have what it takes to beat the Russians in a conventional war, and put up one hell of a fight if it came to trading ICBMs, especially if the Brits help out. As for coordinating the EU forces, the EU has a Military Committee, led by a 4-star general selected by the heads of the militaries of all the member nations, and they've done some joint EU military actions in Africa so they aren't completely inexperienced.

    Of the nations of the EU, France is the heaviest hitter militarily, with the world's third-largest nuclear force, the EU's largest air force, hundreds of helicopters, hundreds of tanks, thousands of other armored vehicles, the largest navy that's not about to Brexit, and more military personnel (210K) than other EU nations. They also generally build their own equipment, and supply a bunch of the other EU nations with materiel. That makes Macron the right person to say this kind of stuff.

    My expectation of what would happen if the Russians decided to really push a conventional attack westwards, and the US and UK basically said "screw this, we're out": Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Ukraine, and Belarus would be occupied very quickly. The main defense of Scandanavia would be the Russians sending more of their stuff south rather than going after them: The Finns are probably in trouble, Sweden's not much better off, and if those two are done so is Norway. I'd expect the defense that would really begin to slow them down to be in Poland and Romania, with substantial help from Greece, who between the 3 of them have 300K troops and a good supply of modern arms for their armies. Slovakia and Hungary are probably saved by the Polish and Romanian efforts on either side of their lines. The biggest players (Germany, France, Italy, Spain) would be able to organize behind that and stabilize the main continental front completely no further west than the old Iron Curtain defense lines (which conveniently means the Swiss can continue to be neutral throughout all this). At which point, the Russians would attempt to solidify their gains by threatening nukes if anybody tries to counter-attack, and we're into Cold War 2.0.

    --
    The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Insightful=2, Total=2
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 07 2018, @06:50PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 07 2018, @06:50PM (#759093)

    You could say they already invaded Europe. 77% of the Russian population is living in Europe (25% of Russian soil). We're not enemies.

    yah европеец

  • (Score: 4, Informative) by Phoenix666 on Wednesday November 07 2018, @11:03PM (3 children)

    by Phoenix666 (552) on Wednesday November 07 2018, @11:03PM (#759197) Journal

    Today's Russia has a population of 144 million. The EU has a population of 513 million. The average life expectancy of a Russian man is 66 years. In the EU it's 79 years. The GDP of Russia is $1.58 trillion dollars. The GDP of the EU is $17.28 trillion.

    In short, Russia is not the threat to the EU that the Soviet Union was to Western Europe in the Cold War.

    Also, George W Bush was reasonably friendly with Russia. During the eastern expansion of NATO that brought in the Baltics Russia became a partner (I forget the exact designation) of the alliance. That was when Yeltsin was around. Putin was the one that eventually ended that relationship and took a stronger stance against NATO. Obama was pretty friendly with the Russians also; there was a PR event in which Secretary of State Hillary Clinton hit a giant restart button to signal a fresh, warmer relationship with Russia under Putin.

    There's an additional dimension to current European security: energy. With Germany, Denmark, and other EU states rapidly moving to renewables dependence upon Russian oil and natural gas is waning, too.

    So in actual military, security terms, the EU's in pretty good shape. There is no pressing need to form an EU army.

    Some people think that 10 million refugees from Syria and North Africa represent a fundamental threat to European security and identity, but I don't. Those refugees are vastly, vastly outnumbered. Even if all of them turned out to be murderous terrorists Europeans could quickly squash them like bugs and kick them out. It's just not even a contest.

    --
    Washington DC delenda est.
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 07 2018, @11:35PM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 07 2018, @11:35PM (#759215)

      there was a PR event in which Secretary of State Hillary Clinton hit a giant restart button to signal a fresh, warmer relationship with Russia under Putin

      Worlds population is afraid that either country push the button and start nuclear holocaust. She push a big fat red button. That's a brilliant morbid joke.

    • (Score: 2) by Lester on Thursday November 08 2018, @11:00AM

      by Lester (6231) on Thursday November 08 2018, @11:00AM (#759336) Journal
      • EU population is much aged than Russian population. So they can conscript much more soldiers. Maybe I'm wrong, but I can't see EU population becoming fierce warriors.
      • Russia has much more natural resources than EU (oil and gas, to begin with). Tanks, jets fighters, bombers, helicopters and trucks don't move with renewables yet.
      • Money marks the difference if you can keep the battle far from your soil. Send armies out of your homeland and use proxy fighters. WW II is a good example. UK, France, Netherlands, Belgium and were much richer than Germany and were crushed by German army. UK survived because it is an island and Hitler was more worried by Eastern front. Without Russia now we would be talking in German. By the way, Russia won WW II, not Western allies, while 40 divisions fought in France since 1944 and and no more 20 in Italy and Africa since 1943, 200 divisions fought in Eastern front since 1940. Western aid to Russia is almost a myth. In 1945, it was less than 10% of Russian own production and, in the worst times, 1940, it was less than 5%. Russia, a country those days with a mostly farming economy, won the powerful Germany almost alone. Think of today that Russia has a military industry.
      • Actual military, security terms, the EU's in pretty good shape in asymmetric wars with the aide of USA, sorry I meant NATO. If Yugoslavia war or current Syria War is an example of EU military power... well
      • 10 millions refugees are a threat if you do nothing. I'm more afraid of an army of lambs led a lion than of an army of lions led by a lamb. No matter how strong you are if you are doubting each minute whether to use the force or not. The will to fight may change a lot of things.