A crudely politically incorrect joke has been making rounds on the internet recently, and to huge applause: a cannibal tribe chief told his tribe members to stop eating one another. Why? Because he realised that the practice would lead to the total extermination of his tribe.
A perfectly timely joke: senior European Union officials have woken up and realised that American President Joe Biden’s administration are capitalising on the Ukraine conflict and the bloc’s economic problems.
What took them so long to realise that it is the U.S. who is profiting from the conflict the most? It doesn’t require expert knowledge of nuclear science to realise that the Americans are all of a sudden selling more natural gas and at higher prices, as well as selling more weapons.
All that when Europe has begun suffering critical shortages. EU sanctions imposed on Russia over her military campaign in Ukraine have led to major disruptions in gas deliveries from Russia to Europe.
The result: the EU is now forced to rely on American gas. It would take a bit of counting to figure out whether it’s only the transportation that causes it, but the fact remains, Americans pay four times less than the Europeans for U.S. gas.
Here’s another issue: eyewitnesses say that when European leaders accosted Biden at the recent G20 meeting, demanding to know the reasons for these “un-friendly tactics,” he “simply seemed unaware.”
Whether he only pretended being in the dark or whether his briefing notes didn’t mention the topic, or whether he forgot them in his hotel room, or whether he just forgot their content, none of it matters. What does matter is the fact the EU countries are sliding down into an economic abyss, and that it seems to suit their American counterparts just fine.
Pissed off like nobody’s business
What also irks the Europeans is the way the U.S. is making a spoiled and rotten stew of their so-called green policies. An incentive scheme which offers huge subsidies and tax breaks to green businesses, a.k.a. Inflation Reduction Act, may kill Europe’s Green Deal. The EU scheme, based on ideology with no regard for basic (and complex) issues of basic economics, is a mill-stone for European economies in and of itself.
Add to it America’s nonsense climate schemes, and what you’re in for is disaster.
In practical and somewhat short-term conditions, it could give American electric vehicle manufacturers an advantage over their EU counterparts in the U.S. market that they view as too lucrative to ignore.
Again, it matters not whether they are correct in their assessment. What does matter is that this is how they see it.
A longer-term view sees the green minds on both sides of the Big Pond moving into an irreconcilable argument that could split the two sides worse than Sir Winston Churchill’s Iron Curtain speech (in Fulton, Missouri, on March 5, 1946) that triggered what become known as the Cold War.
These disagreements may undermine Western efforts to support Ukraine and the transatlantic alliance itself, European Union ideologues fear quite openly.
Besides, America seems to not have realised that Europeans’ public opinion has started shifting away from unconditional support for Volodymyr Zelensky and his regime in Ukraine. That’s what leaked information about the rampant anti-Semitism, neo-Nazism and overall economic and political corruption within Ukraine’s highest offices tends to do.
European Union countries try to impose the strongest forms of censorship, except many of her citizens remember similar measures under both Communism and Nazism. And they are intelligent enough to put two and to together.
Not that Russia is not guilty of similar assault on freedom of information (and, as importantly, freedom of expression). Except, the relentless propaganda attack against Russia seems to have failed miserably: too one-sided.
Trying to hide something
Add to it several European government’s calls for their citizens to snitch on people whose opinions may differ ever so slightly from the official line. Add, also, their calls to include differing opinions into lists of criminal crimes, offences punishable by prison terms and hefty fines, and some Europeans’ eyebrows seem to have started shooting up.
Here’s the Europeans’ view: U.S. defence industry is making gobs of money making new and new weapons to support Ukraine. Meanwhile, EU weapon supplies have been close to nil, and to replenish their own stores, they will have to go begging. Where? To the U.S., of course.
That’s obviously what then-President John Dwight (Ike) Eisenhower had in mind when he spoke in the 1950s and 1960s of the dangers posed by the military-industrial complex.
It would take but a half of a century for him to be proven right.
Russia, the part that is supposed to suffer irreparable losses does suffer human losses on the battlefield. Compared to Ukraine’s losses, Russian casualties are only a fraction.
Still, those losses are tragic. On both sides.
So far as economics go, Russia is on the winning side. Not only because she has found new markets and enhanced those that had existed earlier, but also because her opponents are findings themselves in quagmires of their own doing.
The U.S. could have thought they were winning when they drew Russia into her war on Ukraine. The Americans would fight the Russians till the last Ukrainian standing, defending American business interests.
Now, it turns out that it’s only the direct participants and NATO (both actual members and candidates for membership) who are keenly engaged in the conflict.
The rest of the world seems to be keenly bored. That’s a dangerous game, too, what with the nuclear weapons clatter from both sides. But this is another topic for another day.
Russian government see it as the EU trying to isolate their country but, as their Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova claimed, the EU only “imposes costs on EU countries and their citizens, who are forced to pay out of their own pockets for the strategic blunders of their politicians.”
The real question: who benefits? America’s military-industrial complex, that’s who.
How about the Great Reset crowd?
Yes, now we’re talking. Dividing the world so that killing seven eights of the planet’s population gets easier done than said, that’s where we should be looking for answers.