European voices oppose US leadership for failing to ensure victory.

Brussels – Written by Elijah J. Magnier:

The President of the European Parliament, Charles Michel, said that there are European leaders who are more in tune with French President Emmanuel Macron to achieve European strategic autonomy away from US control. Macron has said that Europe must move away from US influence and become more independent. This admission of European subservience created a whirlwind in the pro-US corridors and Western media loyal to unilateral US hegemony and dominance. What Michel said, however, reflects Europe’s desire to avoid aligning itself with the loser of the US-Russian war in Ukraine and the Old Continent’s desire to keep the line of return open for relations with Russia. When the time comes, and the war is over, Moscow will not hesitate to welcome Europe’s “prodigal son” on different terms.

The French president would not have said that Europe should not be dragged into “wars that are not our own” if he had not realised that the winds were blowing in the opposite direction to the US plans in Ukraine. After dragging Europe into a costly war that destabilised Europe’s economy and well-being, Washington’s global leadership began to waver as Russia advanced on the battlefield. Moreover, Europe has not been clamouring for NATO and the US administration to beat the drums of war in the face of China. Most European leaders would not want to join a new war campaign, despite their membership in the US-led military North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO), which is said to be planning to extend its military activities to the China Sea.

The war that the US has decided to wage in Ukraine – after ignoring the advice of diplomats, academics and experts not to provoke Russia into a fight – will significantly impact US dominance. After all, it is natural that Europe will redouble its blind subservience to the US once the battle is over in Russia’s favour. US military leaders have predicted that “Ukraine will not be able to regain all its lost territory this year”. Other Western leaders have said that “Ukraine will not be able to regain control of Crimea”, which Russia occupied in 2014.

General Mark Milley, Commander of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, was among those who did not expect Ukraine to win. Nevertheless, he called for a continuous supply of arms to Ukraine, ready to fight to the last Ukrainian. These signs paved the way for a change in previous Western claims that the war would end only with Russia’s defeat and Ukraine’s restoration of all its lands.

It is worth noting that France – considered one of the leading industrialised countries in Europe, along with Germany and Italy – has begun to take a different approach to the US-Russian war. Macron has refused to send more arms and ammunition to Ukraine. This could very well mean that there is a prelude to the talks that Europe wants to have as a direct stakeholder in the war because of the geographical factor and that its interests require it to start sending less hostile and less belligerent signals to Russia.

Moscow would not rule out a change in Europe’s policy but will end the war only after imposing its conditions on a defeated Ukraine. It is not excluded that one of Moscow’s conditions could be the participation of countries such as China and Brazil, as well as representatives of the United Nations, as guarantors in the negotiations when the time comes to an end of the military operations. The bridges of trust between Russia and the West have been severely damaged and are not necessarily essential to the resumption of trade and commerce.