The White House from Washington, DC, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons
Perhaps its Global Warming/Climate Crisis (nah, it’s all the fault of DJT) , but the epic meltdown of the European political classes has stepped up a gear of late. Emblematic of the hysteria is this from Norbert Röttgen (a member of the German Bundestag) , dateline 15/12/25 :
For the first time since WWII, the US is not on our side in Europe. It has sided with the aggressor against UK and EUR security, seeking to mediate with Russia. The US no longer sees itself as NATO’s leader and treats Europe as a strategic target.
Such complete bilge. The basic idea is that by forcing Europe to accept reality, the US is siding with the aggressor. Here’s the way the NooYawkTimes puts it:
The future of Ukraine is at the heart of the debate. Mr. Trump is pressing for a settlement to the war on largely Russian terms, and the Europeans see Ukraine as crucial to their own security and are encouraging Kyiv to fight for a better deal.
So, what “better” terms are feasible, actually? We repeatedly hear about “We can’t let Putin win,” the implication being that any end state that does not restore the pre-2014 borders is a grave threat to European security. Riddle me this: how do you plan to get there? How many Ukrainians must die while Keev “fight[s] for a better deal” – that it has no chance of getting? What are the odds that continuing to fight will produce an end result that is worse for European security than what Trump is proposing? Saying that only the impossible is acceptable and that the US is betraying you by failing to go along is exactly why Trump –and Rubio, and Vance, and virtually all of the administration, and most Americans generally – have had it with (in their words) the Euroweenies.
On the one hand, Europe is petrified by the prospects of a Russian invasion – prospects that are completely delusional given the wretched Russian military performance in Ukraine. On the other hand, somehow “strategic stabilisation with Russia” is unacceptable. Er, stabilisation would reduce the already de minimis prospects for a Russian invasion of Europe even further. Cold War-esque stasis would be a great outcome for Europe.
That this stasis would involve Russian rule over a blasted, mine and UXO-strewn, depopulated slice of Ukraine hundreds of miles from the core of the EU is irrelevant. Russian control of a devastated shithole (Donbas) has zero implications for Nato. Extending the war increases the likelihood it will take more of Ukraine than the Donbas. In other words, there is no scenario on a set of positive measure that dominates what a cosmically unjust but actually achievable deal in Ukraine would achieve. Indeed, every alternative realistic scenario is worse. For the US. For Ukraine. And for Europe. Real life often boils down to choosing the least bad option. This is a reality that Europe fails to grasp.
Europe also fails to acknowledge the fact that by letting Russia fuel it, Europe has fueled Russia’s aggression by more than it has supported Ukraine. From the time of Putin’s first incursion in 2014 through 2022, Europe spent between €750 billion and €1 trillion on Russian oil, gas, and coal. Since the 2022 invasion, those expenditures have dropped, but still total around €80 billion. (Some estimates are higher, if you believe AI) . In contrast, European military assistance to Ukraine amounts to €66 billion. & lets not forget : Trump attacked European reliance on Russian energy during his first term. The European (specifically German) response? Supercilious smirking…………. Who’s smirking now, ? Choices were made, and those who made them now squeal about being forcefully reminded of it. US response ? Too bad. Cry more. Europe complains of having deals done over its head. Well, this is habbening because it (again mulishly defying Trump warnings) chose to so under invest in the military that it is now so short on hard power that everything is over its head.
But, wait for this Haiku from Gunther Fehlinger-Jahn (an Austrian economist/political figure known for his strong advocacy of NATO and EU expansion, as well his hardline stance against Russia.) Here he channels his inner Bismark & comes out with :
I want a EU that strikes fear in Hearts of our enemies
A EU built by Steel & AI
A EU with a heart of Iron 5.0
A EU that lets your fire rise
Well, I want a super yacht crewed by Sydney Sweeney clones. My odds are way better than Gunther’s. Back on Earth, an article in Politico 12/12/25 (unintentionally) admits what is really going on here:
Hard-right and far-right politicians now lead the polls in France, the U.K. and even Germany
The European ruling class is besieged. The peasants are revolting, and the ruling class is channeling its raison d’être. All the while mouthing pieties about “democracy,” the ruling class is doing everything possible to squash the prospect of government by the people, from suppressing speech to cracking down on non-ruling class parties, even considering cancellation of elections. It is deeply insecure, with good reason. And by speaking bluntly, the Trump National Security Strategy has stoked those insecurities. Indeed, the panicked and hysterical European “elite” reaction betrays their sense of weakness and fear. In their hearts, they know he’s right, but to admit it would be a confession of their own abject failure.
© DJM 2026
