There was a clear warning from Putin on provision of long range missiles that could hit deep into Russia to Ukraine. It would be consider as a direct attack by NATO on Russia. Biden has done just that!
While game-playing the future, one of the main flashpoints we came across, where the global conflict can start, was the Arctic. We look at it in complete detail.
The premise and the mindset apparent in the new Trump team points to an interesting world out there. Things will not be rosy, but they will be very different. Very, very different.
Europe is facing an existential crisis. Partly manufactured and partly beyond its bounds. It is responding with the familiar formula of handing its future to the Military Industrial Complex that thrives of wars.
In the unfolding geostrategic events, analysts do not talk about Europe as a player and a major actor. It is always discussed as a has-been and hapless victim just waiting on the chopping block of history.
Maybe it is not.
Given its DNA of past (not so long ago) "glory" of dominance and violence, will it abandon its supremacy so easily?
We evaluate the war preparations and strengthening of Europe's military might. Along the lines of American experiments with Military Industrial formula.
The results that Americans have been witness to will most certainly repeat in Europe as well.
As a large sum of wealth transfers from Western taxpayers to the elite few across the US and Europe, we would have seen how we call funded our own demise.
What we do takes a lot of work. So, if you like our content and value the work that we are doing, please do consider contributing to our expenses. Choose the USD equivalent amount in your own currency you are comfortable with.
Politico found in one of its studies that a group of Chinese universities with links to the Chinese military have been running projects funded by the European Union.
Over the last ten years, the EU has provided funding of at least €26 million to a minimum of 14 projects that collaborated with Chinese universities (known as the "Seven Sons of National Defense") considered "high-risk" by experts. Eight of these projects are currently still in progress. The research topics varied widely, including decarbonization, climate modeling, heating and cooling technology, antennas, and motor propulsion technology.
The strange thing is that the Chinese have not just infiltrated the European universities in sciences to get top research inputs into its own military technologies via European money, but they have infiltrated the European universities even to redefine the Human Rights definition. Specifically concerning China's record itself.
The whole scenario is so bizarre, that the only question one needs to ask now is:
The security mechanisms within Europe are obviously clueless regarding the sophistication of Chinese tactics and archaic enough to even secure their confidential communications.
Some of Germany’s allies are urging Berlin to tighten up security around classified information after Russia revealed sensitive discussions about military aid for Ukraine. Officials from NATO countries expressed concern about apparently careless operational security that resulted in the leak of a conversation between senior German military officers, including the use of video conferencing platform WebEx for the meeting, people familiar with the discussions said. (Source: German Allies Tell Berlin to Fix Security After Russian Leak / Bloomberg)
Using Webex to discuss confidential details of war matters? Is that what Germany has now come to?
Interestingly, a leak of classified documents produced by Germany's Defense Ministry, that were obtained by Bild, a German tabloid, shares the chilling scenario where Russia goes after NATO once it wins its war in Ukraine.
The documents, produced by Germany's Defense Ministry, imagine a situation in which Russia launches a massive spring 2024 offensive to take advantage of waning Western support. In this scenario, it defeats Ukraine. The documents are not a prediction but part of worst-case-scenario planning, a common exercise within militaries. A German official called the scenario "extremely unlikely." The German documents imagine Russia turning its sights on NATO members in Eastern Europe, with it seeking to destabilize its enemies through cyberattacks and inciting internal chaos in the Baltic states of Estonia, Lithuania, and Latvia. They describe Russia staging a series of escalations, then moving troops and weapons closer to the Baltic states, via its ally Belarus and Kaliningrad, a small, detached region of Russia surrounded by NATO states and the Baltic Sea. (Source: "Leaked German military documents laid out a doomsday scenario where Russia wins in Ukraine then invades Europe" / Business Insider)
It is interesting and disturbing, isn't it?
Meanwhile, Europe and Germany are on a march.
The European Union is taking significant steps to strengthen its defense capabilities while maintaining a complementary relationship with NATO.
In March 2024, the EU agreed to provide 5 billion euros for military aid to Ukraine. Great charity, right?
Wrong!
It is an open call for funding a war to build Europe's own military-industrial complex. The Ukrainians will pay for it with their own lives.
But why is this happening?
This move comes as the EU faces challenges in combat readiness, ammunition shortages, and the need to reduce dependence on external defense procurement.
The European Union (EU) is grappling with several significant challenges in its defense sector, particularly regarding combat readiness, ammunition shortages, and the need to reduce dependence on external defense procurement.
The EU's combat readiness is being severely tested by the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, which has highlighted acute shortages in ammunition supplies. The EU had pledged to deliver one million rounds of ammunition to Ukraine within a year but has fallen short of this target. As of mid-2024, only about 330,000 rounds had been delivered, with the European Commission expecting to reach just over half a million by the end of the year.
And in this standing up of the European Military Industrial Complex, they are not alone. NATO's overall strategic vision is backing it as well.
The EU's Strategic Compass and NATO's Strategic Concept are guiding these efforts, with both organizations working to enhance interoperability, address capability gaps, and improve crisis response capabilities.
The EU's Strategic Compass, adopted in March 2022, outlines the EU's security and defense strategy for the coming years. While it doesn't specifically focus on Ukraine, it has influenced the EU's response to Russia's aggression and its support for Ukraine. The Strategic Compass emphasizes the need for the EU to enhance its strategic autonomy and ability to act rapidly in crises.
NATO's Strategic Concept, on the other hand, is a separate document that guides NATO's overall strategy. While it doesn't directly guide the EU's ammunition supplies to Ukraine, NATO and EU efforts are complementary. The EU's actions align with the broader transatlantic security cooperation, as emphasized in both the Strategic Compass and NATO's approach.
In response to Ukraine's urgent need for ammunition, the EU launched an initiative in March 2023 to deliver 1 million rounds of artillery ammunition to Ukraine within a year. This initiative, while not directly part of the Strategic Compass, aligns with its goals of enhancing EU defense capabilities and responding to crises.
The EU's ammunition initiative consists of three tracks:
The European Defence Industry Reinforcement through Common Procurement Act was also adopted in October 2023 with a budget of €300 million to support joint procurement efforts. (Source: Annual Report on the Implementation of the Strategic Compass for Security and Defence / March 2024)
While progress has been made, the EU is expected to deliver just over half a million rounds by the end of March 2024, falling short of the initial 1 million round target. However, industrial capacity in Europe is estimated to reach around 1.4 million rounds per year by the end of 2024, which should allow the EU to meet and exceed its objective.
If you really look at it, Europe is buying time until they can get their act together. They know Europe is not quite there. They understand the dangers staring in their face with the coming together of China and Russia. They don't want the hell to be unleashed by those two until Europe has its defenses and offensive munitions in place.
So, while the EU's Strategic Compass provides a broader framework for EU security and defense policy, specific ammunition initiatives have been undertaken by Europe related to the Ukraine war. The War enabled Europe to develop its Compass as a rapid response to the ongoing conflict, while planning for a larger geopolitical reality - that EU is on its own!
In that sense, the Ukraine boost, though not directly part of the Strategic Compass, aligns with its goals of enhancing EU defense capabilities for a changing world.
Now, let us get into the European defense readiness and industrial strategy to improve things.
EU's own military-industrial complex is a direct consequence of Europe's need to arm itself and improve its defense readiness.
A look at its preparedness.
Increased Defense Spending and Production Capacity: EU defense spending reached a record €270 billion in 2023, reflecting growing awareness of security threats. The European defense industry has increased its production capacity for ammunition by 40%. However, this increase still falls short of addressing all capability gaps, particularly in areas like air defense systems and long-range precision weapons.
Capability Gaps and Production Challenges: Despite increased spending, Europe continues to face shortages in critical areas such as ammunition, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance capabilities. As we saw above, the Ukraine war has highlighted the slow responsiveness of Europe's defense industrial base after decades of reduced investments. Many European nations remain unprepared for sustained high-intensity conflict, with countries like Britain, France, Denmark, and Germany facing significant shortfalls in operational equipment and ammunition stockpiles.
Collaborative Procurement and European Sourcing: The European Defence Industrial Strategy (EDIS) is a comprehensive initiative aimed at bolstering the European Union's defense capabilities through increased collaboration and investment within the EU. The strategy sets ambitious targets to enhance the competitiveness and readiness of the European Defence Technological and Industrial Base (EDTIB). By 2030, at least 40% of defense equipment procurement by EU member states should be conducted collaboratively. This aims to foster cooperation among member states, streamline procurement processes, and achieve economies of scale. The strategy mandates that by 2030, 50% of the defense equipment procured by member states should be sourced from within the EU. This target is set to increase to 60% by 2035, reducing dependency on non-EU suppliers and strengthening the internal market. This shift towards European sourcing is intended to reduce the current 78% of European defense acquisitions that come from outside the EU. But there is a self-inflicted problem - achieving these targets faces challenges due to existing NATO standards and preferences for U.S. equipment among some member states.
Funding and Political Challenges: While the EU has allocated €1.5 billion for the European Defence Industry Programme (EDIP) between 2025 and 2027, this represents only about 0.2% of European defense spending. Estimates suggest that a robust defense strategy would require around €100 billion, highlighting a significant funding gap. Political disagreements over financing and the role of the European Commission in coordinating defense efforts further complicate progress.
Interoperability and NATO Relations: As the EU develops its defense capabilities, maintaining interoperability with NATO remains crucial. The EU's Strategic Compass recognizes NATO as the primary organization for collective defense. However, standardizing arms across EU members while maintaining compatibility with NATO systems presents a challenge, particularly for countries that have invested heavily in U.S. equipment.
Long-term Vision and Readiness Goals: The European Defence Industrial Strategy sets a clear, long-term vision to achieve defense industrial readiness. By 2030, the strategy aims for EU countries to trade at least 35% of defense goods between EU countries instead of with other nations, which could enhance overall European defense autonomy and readiness. However, the immediate requirements of Ukraine and short-term capability shortfalls are not directly addressed by these long-term initiatives.
All are great steps. But is Europe there?
To understand where Europe is going, we need to understand a couple of initiatives - the European Defense Industrial Strategy (EDIS) and the European Defence Industry Programme (EDIP).
European Defense Industrial Strategy (EDIS): Unveiled in March 2024, EDIS represents the EU's first comprehensive plan to enhance its defense industrial readiness. The strategy aims to encourage member states to "invest more, better, together and European" in defense capabilities.
Key targets include:
European Defence Industry Programme (EDIP): Accompanying the European Defence Industrial Strategy (EDIS), the European Defence Industry Programme (EDIP) will act as a gap-filler from 2025 to 2027, with an allocation of €1.5 billion. This funding aims to enhance the competitiveness and responsiveness of the EU defense industry, ensuring the availability and supply of defense products.
This program aims to ensure the availability and supply of critical defense products.
Financial Tools and Mechanisms: The EU is introducing several new financial instruments to support its defense industrial goals:
Two more frameworks influence EU's defense going froward. They are European Defence Agency (EDA) and Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO),
The EDA plays a pivotal role in enhancing defense cooperation among EU member states. The Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO), on the other hand, established in 2017, is a key framework under the EU's security and defense policy aimed at deepening defense cooperation among member states.
These two are integral components of the EU's efforts to strengthen defense cooperation and capabilities. The EDA acts as a central hub for defense collaboration, while PESCO provides a structured framework for deeper integration and joint capability development among member states.
Despite these ambitious initiatives, the EU faces several hurdles in establishing its military-industrial complex:
The €1.5 billion allocated for EDIP represents only about 0.2% of total European defense spending, potentially limiting its impact on shaping the market. Larger member states may resist perceived power grabs by the European Commission in defense matters, and many EU militaries are integrated with NATO standards, with significant portions of their systems coming from the US, complicating efforts to standardize on new EU platforms. Additionally, member states disagree on financing methods and the extent of the Commission's role in coordinating defense efforts. Moreover, these initiatives are unlikely to address immediate capability shortfalls or Ukraine's urgent needs, given the typical timeframes for implementation.
Despite these challenges, the EU's push to develop its military-industrial complex represents a significant shift in European defense policy. Success will depend on overcoming longstanding issues related to national sovereignty, securing adequate long-term funding, and balancing strategic priorities among member states.
NATO is a critical player in all this. NATO continues to play a crucial role in European defense while the EU is building its own military-industrial capabilities.
NATO remains the primary framework for collective defense in Europe, with its 2022 Strategic Concept reaffirming NATO's core tasks of deterrence and defense, crisis prevention and management, and cooperative security.
Key aspects of NATO's role in EU defense include:
However, challenges remain in fully aligning NATO and EU defense efforts. These include:
As the EU develops its defense industrial base, close coordination with NATO will be essential to ensure complementarity and avoid fragmentation of European defense efforts. The success of both NATO and EU initiatives will be crucial for enhancing Europe's overall security posture in an increasingly complex geopolitical environment.
The question would obviously be - why is NATO (primarily the US - since it has the largest share) helping the EU arm itself? Wouldn't the US lose its dominance?
More than the dominance, the US is now realizing that with multiple fronts open, the US alone cannot fight it out. It needs an ally. Unfortunately, it spent the last 70 years dismantling that ally!
The U.S. and allied military leadership — both at the U.S. European Command and the Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe — has worked tirelessly to return NATO to its original role of providing collective deterrence and defense. The alliance now has regional plans, with force generation capabilities requirements that will restore this primary function. But if Europe doesn’t spend the money to expand its defense industrial base and provide real military capabilities to make these new regional plans credible, their execution will be fraught with unacceptable risk. And yet, judging by the uneven response from several European capitals regarding spending money on defense, allies seem locked in a culture of talking big while relying on the U.S. to shoulder the lion’s share of the burden. Today, only 18 of NATO’s 32 members are spending — or have promised to spend — the pledged 2 percent of GDP on defense. To put this in perspective, during the Cold War, European countries were spending, on average, 3 to 5 percent of GDP on defense. (Source: Without European rearmament, NATO is setting itself up for failure / Politico)
And with that, the formula used in the US - of handing off the defense of the societies to the military contractors - is being replicated in Europe as well.
One of the proposed measures even copies the U.S. Foreign Military Sales scheme, making it easier to sell weapons to third countries, while another would make it simpler for governments to take over civilian production in case of an emergency. (Source: EU plans to create defense-industrial complex ready for war / Politico)
The formula just doesn't change.
The wheels of the bus go round and round....
The 90s were the growth and peace era. After 9-11, the wars started again and it was the time when the military companies started to rule the landscape. Politically the American elite was on the payroll of the contractor lobby.
European states did not have to do much though. They went through an era of procrastination and easy life.
Well, that "peace dividend era" is now over.
If European states had kept on the trajectory of its defense spending in 1992 it would have spent at least $8.6 trillion more on defense. As much of a villain as Trump was made out to be, the truth is that his jibes against Europe were bang on. European states have underspent even their 2% GDP targets by $1.6 trillion!
Europe’s defense spending since 1992 was lower than previous periods in the past—a cumulative difference of about $8.6 trillion (Exhibit 1). Our analysis also shows that, over the past three decades, European NATO countries have spent $1.6 trillion less than they would have had they met the 2 percent of GDP target stipulated by the Alliance. Ten European NATO members (Estonia, Finland, Greece, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, and the United Kingdom) were expected to meet or exceed the 2 percent target in 2023, based on official NATO estimates as of July 2023. (Source: Innovation and efficiency: Increasing Europe’s defense capabilities / McKinsey)
Here is the illustration that shows it very clearly.
That may be changing. Led by France and Germany.
In April 2024, France's President Emmanuel Macron called for a "sustainable" effort to scale up weapons production following the Russian invasion of Ukraine as he laid a foundation stone for a much-needed gunpowder factory. "Long term we are looking at a geopolitical, geostrategic shift in which defense industries will play a growing role," he said.
Basically, it was a call for subtly saying that the "time had come" to bring in the global annihilators. Those who make money by preying upon innocent human beings in far off societies.
Europe is now getting ready for the War Economy.
The contractors in Europe are now on a high. The EU largesse is lining their pockets well.
The conflict and rising geopolitical tensions elsewhere, including in the Middle East, have boosted the order books of large, established players and their suppliers. Global defence spending hit a record $2.2tn last year, while in Europe it rose to $388bn, levels not seen since the cold war, according to the International Institute for Strategic Studies. These new orders have transformed the fortunes of Europe’s defence contractors, with the combined backlog of the region’s top seven companies in the sector — including BAE Systems, Leonardo and Saab — rising to near-record highs of more than $300bn. (Source: "The companies benefiting from Europe’s defence revival" / Financial Times)
Here is a graph of the stocks of the top military contractors.
The stock prices are shooting up.
The order backlogs have grown substantially.
It follows the pattern in the US. Money is being siphoned off to the top military contractors.
Each year, more than half of the US military budget is transferred to the private sector through federal contracts. Of the $14.5 trillion the Pentagon spent between fiscal years 2002 and 2021, 55 percent went to military contractors. The portion of spending dedicated to contracts varied little during this period; contract values grew and shrank as overall budgets did. (Source: How the Military-Industrial Complex Gets Its Power and Harms Workers, in 6 Graphs / Jacobin)
Great. Then what is the problem? EU and US will work the same way and have enough wherewithal to dominate the world - yet again.
The only problem in this whole scenario is that the EU is no US. It has lagged far behind the US.
The GDP which was almost the same in 2008 has widened tremendously. The gap is now 80%!
GDP growth in the US has been stronger than in the EU in recent years. In 2023, for example, the US GDP growth rose to 2.5%, while in the Eurozone it decelerated to 0.5%.
The fall of Europe is not just a bad economy but also an aging population.
Labor shortages and a population of innovators being swapped by lower educated and lower income targeting population is taking Europe towards its own demise.
Then there was an imminent energy crisis looming over Europe. It still is. But Reuters declared that the energy crisis is over.
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and sanctions imposed in response by the U.S. and its allies disrupted energy supplies that were already stretched by the rebound in industrial production after the coronavirus epidemic.But 18-24 months later, the acute phase of the adjustment is complete, with energy inventories comfortable and prices reverting towards long-term inflation-adjusted averages. There will undoubtedly be more shocks in future, but the disruption associated with the end of the pandemic and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is over. Markets have adapted. (Source: Europe’s energy crisis is over / Reuters)
For now.
And not because of some hard work but because of a "backdoor solution", where Russian oil refined by India was brought into Europe to weather the storm.
Not only did India's action of buying Russian oil help Europe directly (or via what some disgruntled analysts call "Oil Laundering") but also indirectly. That meant that the oil coming from other sources also became available that much more for Europe.
And the prices did not rise that much.
While India has sharply increased imports from Russia, its purchases from other major suppliers have dropped, freeing up more oil for countries in Europe and elsewhere. In fact, India saw imports from six of its top 10 suppliers fall in fiscal 2022, including a decrease of 49% from Nigeria, 24% from the U.S., 18% from Kuwait and 10% from Iraq. These nations apparently increased exports to countries other than India, including members of the G7 and EU. India has also refined a large portion of imported Russian oil into products to be sold to countries that have joined the sanctions in a process some pundits half-jokingly called "oil laundering." India's shipments of petroleum products to the Netherlands surged 70% in fiscal 2022, making it the top supplier to Europe's oil trade hub, up from third place the year before. India's petroleum products appear to have offset shortages of Russian supplies to the EU. (Source: "How India's Modi helped save the West by buying Russian oil" / Nikkei)
So the full-fledged energy crisis may have been pushed off for now. But for how long is the only question.
The root of the crisis may be the dichotomy between the mandate of the EU as a trade mechanism to becoming an overbearing bureaucracy.
At the heart of this slide is a general frustration within Europe. Fueled by a complete disconnect between laypeople and the EU elite in Brussels.
But as the latest round of elections throughout Europe have illustrated, this frustration has now taken root at the very heart of Europe: places such as the Netherlands, France and even Germany, long considered core eurozone countries. (Source: This time, the EU could collapse This decade could well be the Union's last / Unherd)
A profound change is sweeping across Europe.
And it is finding expression on the streets.
The Great Britain is turning into The Burning Britain, thanks to immigrants of a particular community pic.twitter.com/5uyMz3gJMj
— Ra_Bies 3.0 (@Ra_Bies) July 19, 2024
While discussing the currently unfolding violence across parts of Britain, Hampshire's Police & Crime Commissioner shared her views. She seemed to suggest that the incidents where British "nationalists" have started rioting over the killing of three young girls in Southport were a manifestation of the broader societal feeling of being hounded in their own country by the immigrants.
The local politicians, of course, are denouncing her statement. (for example - Danny CHambers' X Post)
Over 90 people have been arrested in various cities, including London, Manchester, Liverpool, and Sunderland. The protests have involved violent clashes with police
About 90 people have been arrested after the far-right clashed with police officers in major cities across the UK as authorities warned more disorder is likely in the coming days. Shops were looted and a library was torched after “violent thugs” clashed with police in several cities including Manchester, Liverpool, Hull and Stoke on Saturday. (Source: UK riots live: Far-right violence descends into looting as mob torches library and police warn of more chaos / The Independent)
Last year it was France when on 27 June 2023, with the death of Nahel, a 17-year-old French-Algerian who was shot dead by a police officer when he allegedly refused to cooperate with the authorities, riots broke off. (Source: differences between urban violence of 2023 and 2005 / Euro News) That riot cost France at least $1 billion.
It is obvious to any outsider analyst that Europe is experiencing a tectonic-level change underlying the social milieu it has chosen to construct for itself. Over the years, it has brought in Middle-Eastern refugees and has placed them on a pedestal above their own populations.
These are bound to have serious consequences.
That was internal. There is an "external" confusion as well.
Thinkers looking at the continent's future believe that it is facing a geostrategic firestorm. And, part of it may be due to the overall confusion about what the EU was supposed to be.
In that change, EU lost its own future by becoming America's lackey.
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022 changed everything by bringing home the idea that there could be a full-scale war on the European continent. This is not simply a security crisis but one that goes to the heart of the EU’s identity. The more than two years since have not just forced Europeans to think differently about policy, but they have also changed something more fundamental—how different states think about their identity and the purpose of the European project. For the last few decades, European integration had been conceived as a peace project with a focus on prosperity, trade, and quality of life, but now the impetus of integration is coming from war. And through these deeper changes to the identity of key European powers, the outlines of a truly geopolitical Europe are beginning to take shape for the very first time. The EU’s passage from peace to war project has a number of dimensions. (Source: Nine Thinkers on the Continent's Post-American Future / Foreign Policy)
This change may have been prompted by the specter of the re-election of Trump in the US. Trump has threatened to undermine NATO - the one alliance that has saved Europe until now.
The undercurrent of dread at Truman Hall was not unique. I encountered it in nearly every conversation I had while traveling through Europe this spring. In capitals across the continent—from Brussels to Berlin, Warsaw to Tallinn—leaders and diplomats expressed a sense of alarm bordering on panic at the prospect of Donald Trump’s reelection. “We’re in a very precarious place,” one senior NATO official told me. He wasn’t supposed to talk about such things on the record, but it was hardly a secret. The largest armed conflict in Europe since World War II was grinding into its third year. The Ukrainian counteroffensive had failed, and Russia was gaining momentum. Sixty billion dollars in desperately needed military aid for Ukraine had been stalled for months in the dysfunctional U.S. Congress. And, perhaps most ominous, America—the country with by far the biggest military in NATO—appeared on the verge of reelecting a president who has repeatedly threatened to withdraw the U.S. from the alliance. (Source: How the U.S.'s European Allies Are Preparing for a Second Trump Term / The Atlantic)
The inability to come to terms with a changing America is palpable in Europe.
“What the fuck is happening in the United States?”
This is how a 25-year-old Polish grad student and government worker who wore sneakers and a T-shirt that said BE BRAVE reacted to the coming US election.
So what are we really looking at now?
A Europe that was working to unite en masse just a few years back is now moving towards a break-up of sorts. This Europe has an elite that is far too disconnected from the laypeople.
Because of this disconnect, they make decisions that - per some - fundamentally create an existential crisis.
The coming of hordes of illegal immigrants into EU states has meant that Democracy, Free Speech, and all those values are now at stake.
For some time, frustration against this simmers inside them. Eventually, large-scale protests and violence will be the consequence.
The next major European war will have a street component. You cannot bomb the criminals in your own country. So, it will have to have a hand-to-hand combat between at least the two major forces - Middle Eastern immigrants and the aggressive locals trying to get "their" nation for themselves.
Nationalism - or xenophobia as some prefer to call it - will rise further. The tide will be difficult to stop.
While handing over the keys to Europe's security to the Military Industrial Complex may help.
That will help in establishing Europe's power across the world if it can stand up the military might it hopes to. Quite contrary to how many analysts brush Europe aside, the military power that it can project will be difficult to ignore.
The real problem in Europe may not come from outside after all. Even if it does not meet its own goals of a military complex. For, even then it will have enough wherewithal to be lethal.
The danger to its existence may come from within.
The fact is Europe faces the imminent destruction of its societies due to the widespread politically useful illegal immigration that stares right in its face. The population swap in the next generation and the incumbent problems from a different ethos that comes with the kind of culture that these immigrants are bringing along, Europe of 2050 may have the military might but a very different mind at the helm.
While game-playing the future, one of the main flashpoints we came across, where the global conflict can start, was the Arctic. We look at it in complete detail.
North Korea launched its most advanced monster missile yet. China is readying its 'mysterious' amphibious ship. Russia is advancing in Ukraine while losing men. America goes to poll and civil uncertainty. Global economy is on the brink. What is coming? Let's game plan it.
Current American establishment's quest for control and "teaching countries lessons" is pushing the geostrategic chessboard in a certain direction. The resultant Indo-China rapprochement may be a watershed moment in this century. A detailed analysis.
The obsession and the rampant involvement of elite academic and media institutions in long-arc narrative building to shape, control and subvert the world may ultimately lead to their own downfall. It is visible already.
Every Sunday AM (US Time)/ PM (India time), we send out a weekly detailed newsletter. We also share other insightful notes during the week. Its free. Do sign up and share with friends!
