The Hungarian government are not even trying to hide their love for Putin’s Russia:
It was a monumental error for NATO to not have an eject-a-member-by-a-certain-number-of-votes article in the charter.
They can probably freeze them out though. I imagine there’s not much information sharing going on right now for instance.
Neither does the EU, but do you know of any international organisation that has such a provison? The only “organisation” thar has expelled a “member” that I know of are the G7, former G8, who expelled Russia after the invasion of Crimea, and I have always claimed that they are not a proper international organisation but a private club, just like the BRICS.
The decision making body for NATO, the NATO Council, requires unanimity for decisions though. Individual members can stil take individual or non-alliance multilateral action. The work around is ad hoc and fails to capture the advantages and efficiencies of using the existing full alliance systems and networks.
When I was in Bosnia we had a secret level classified system named Mercury that carried information for all of the peacekeepers which included non-NATO countries including Russia before my time. I had a computer on that network at my work station. Downstairs through a couple locked doors there was a NATO only secret system, I couldn’t have a computer with that on my desk since my office was open to non-NATO peacekeepers with Secret or greater clearance. Once a week I had to pull non-NATO only information off off an overall NATO Secret document that went to my NATO only secret email account downstairs. By regulation using a thumb drive or disk between the two systems was not allowed because of the security risk. So I would typically make the walk a couple times, since they were usually late on releasing it, then go back upstairs where I manually included it on the order for the all peacekeepers network. The workarounds are costly.
Thank you, I overlooked this rather vital piece of information!
Does this sound like Germany’s support will continue regardless of who is President in January?
I wouldn’t be surprised if European NATO countries are ready to ignore a unreliable US government.
Unfortunately the largest stockpile of weapons and equipment is in the US. The European countries in NATO can only do so much. They can’t put their own defense in jeopardy.
Under the current German government, yes - unfortunately it is not clear if that government is going to make it to the September 2025 elections. The smallest (yellow) party in the governing red/green/yellow ‚traffic light‘ coalition is doing its damnedest to either leave or be kicked out (over issues unrelated to Ukraine). If that happens there will be a government without a parliamentary majority pending early elections and subsequent coalition negotiations, i.e. some months where it will be very difficult (or impossible, the Bundestag being dissolved) to get any needed money for helping Ukraine approved by the Bundestag.
Now President Biden should strongly consider allowing Ukraine to strike military targets inside Russia. Ukraine wants to strike the N Korean training camps ASAP.
Give Ukraine a chance to prove the effectiveness.
Trump will change many existing policies in January. That’s stating the obvious.
It doesn’t necessarily mean the EU and NATO will do the same in regards to Ukraine.
Can Biden authorize another milirary aid package without support in Congress? This will be the last chance to support Ukraine with more US ATACMS missiles and at least one more Patriot System.
Aaand … just a few hours later, the German governing coalition has parted ways. Minority government until 15 January when the Chancellor will call for and lose a vote of confidence; dissolution of parliament and caretaker government then until general elections in March. The good news is that the new government formed in April or May, whatever its composition, will be of pro-Ukraine parties (absent a black swan event); the bad news is that there will not be a Chancellor with a parliamentary majority until April or May.
Probably needs a new thread, but …
AfD?
I hadn’t considered the grasp of power gives Putin a big advantage. He’s still there and more determined than ever to crush Ukraine.
Some of the Western governments are changing and may not have the same support for Ukraine.
Britain has changed Prime Ministers three times since the war started?
Like in Germany there is broad cross-party support for aiding Ukraine in the UK.
As for Trump, the only way he can end the war “tomorrow” is if he tells Putin he will ask Ukraine to give up the areas Russia occupy if Putin agrees to end any ambitions for further territory in either Ukraine or in Europe. Ukraine will not agree of course (and perhaps neither will Putin) but I wonder if that’s what he’ll try to do.
If Trump tries to break NATO I think he’ll get considerable push back from Republicans and the NATO countries will look away from the US and steadily decrease the billions they pour into contracts with US defence companies.
Ah, the “peace in our time” gambit; worked out so well for Czechoslovakia…
Press on.
Trump can shut off military aid to Ukraine
That could include satellite intel.
Ukraine could fight on for awhile but that wouldn’t be smart. The loss of intel cuts off the drone targets inside Russia. Europe says they’ll continue military aid. But will that be enough?
Ukraine needs to end the fighting and save their inventory of weapons, Patriot surface-to-air missile system, and F-16 jets. They are much better armed now then they were when this war started. There was news today that Biden plans one last multi billion dollar military aid package.
Maybe the situation would be different if Russia wasn’t getting help from Iran and North Korea.
The US isn’t the only nation with spy satellites.
And even if the US aid dries up, Ukraine can fight on for longer than Russia can.
Ukraine is in very dire straits.
NATO materiel is in short supply. Many nations are severely cutting military materiel shipments to Ukraine, because their own supplies are low. The U.S. could provide a considerable amount, but not enough or of enough variety to help that much. Manufacture of new materiel is taking too long to ramp up. A lot of what is being “given” to Ukraine does not actually yet exist. Promises of future materiel to be given someday. Money is being given. That is definitely helping. Keeping pay and services running. A great help to all Ukrainians. But less of a military help.
Shortages of everything is hamstringing the military. That includes personnel. Losses of materiel and personnel are not being replaced to keep even, let alone increase ability. Ukraine forces are falling short in pretty much every aspect. Russian forces are increasing the area and speed at which they capture and recapture territory.
Even western mainstream media is reporting a deteriorating situation. The maps show that as well.
Now that Trump is coming in, the situation may become much worse. U.S. aid may fall drastically.
I think Ukraine does not have much time left. Unless something very big and unusual happens. But such a thing may bring on a worse situation going forward.
2 posts were merged into an existing topic: Everlong88 Cornfielded Posts
This is not based in reality.
Would Russia want that? With current level of support, let alone the US dropping out, Russia is advancing. Odessa is a huge strategic bonus for them if they can get it. Also access to Transnistria.
Russia is losing irreplaceable air defenses, EW planes, and other weapons systems, and oil infrastructure. Ukraine is losing mud. Russia needs what Ukraine is taking out a lot more than Ukraine needs the few kilometers of territory that Russia is taking.
Just the fact that we’re talking about help from North Korea as being significant should highlight just how desperate Russia’s situation is.