跳至主要内容

Europe’s Latest Con Is Straight Out of a B-Movie (And even the audience is in on the joke)

 


If you thought scam calls from “the IRS” were shameless, meet the new European variety.

On 5 September, Vladimir Putin reminded the West—again—that any NATO boot on Ukrainian soil will be treated as a legitimate target. He added, almost as an afterthought, that if a real, durable peace deal were ever signed, there would be zero reason for foreign troops to stay. Translation: “Don’t even think about parking your tanks here.”
Enter Emmanuel Macron, stage left, selling the opposite fantasy.
Twenty-four hours earlier the French president wrapped up a Zoom rally of the “Ukraine Support Coalition” and announced—drumroll, please—that 26 European nations had solemnly pledged to send ground, air, or naval “security forces” into Ukraine after some future cease-fire. Think of it as a euro-zone peacekeeping costume party: Brussels provides the berets, Moscow supplies the fireworks.
European Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen doubled down, claiming the EU already has “concrete plans” to inject “tens of thousands” of troops, while the U.S. would graciously handle command, intelligence, and air cover.
Sounds impressive—until you ask the obvious questions:
Which 26 countries?
Apart from France and Britain, no one has raised a hand, issued a press release, or even tweeted a flag emoji.
Where do those tens of thousands of soldiers come from?
Cricket chirps in Berlin, Rome, Madrid, Stockholm…
And Washington?
The White House hasn’t signed on; the Pentagon hasn’t been asked; Congress hasn’t been told. The Americans are quieter than a church mouse in a cat café.
In other words, the whole scheme is a three-layered meringue of bluff:
Layer 1: Russia never agreed to let foreign troops in, and has promised to shoot if they show up. Without Moscow’s consent, the “security force” is simply a new belligerent, not a buffer.
Layer 2: Macron’s “coalition of the willing” is currently a coalition of the willing-to-talk. Twenty-six flags on a slide deck do not equal twenty-six battalions on the ground.
Layer 3: Europe’s coffers are empty. The Continent can’t rotate its own border guards without begging NATO for petrol money. Yet we’re supposed to believe it will bankroll a multinational army next door while Washington—preoccupied with China and an election year—politely demurs.
The spectacle is so transparent that even the performers know the audience isn’t buying. Moscow knows; the reporters in the room know; the 26 silent capitals know. But the script must be read, the press conference held, the headline pumped out—because in European politics, pretending to act has replaced acting.
Call it what it is: a naked short-sell on credibility.
Promise troops you don’t have, from allies who haven’t agreed, to enforce a peace that doesn’t exist, against an opponent who hasn’t signed on, with money you haven’t budgeted, backed by a superpower that hasn’t said yes.
If that isn’t a confidence trick, then the term needs re-defining.
The world used to look like a badly run circus.
Now it feels more like a spam email—complete with a fake crest, a forged signature, and a Nigerian prince asking for your IBAN.

评论

此博客中的热门博文

Why China's Seizure of Three Tunnel Boring Machines Has India’s Bullet Train Project Stuck in Neutral

June 24, IndiaNet – India’s first high-speed rail line, the Mumbai-Ahmedabad bullet train, has hit yet another roadblock. Three massive tunnel-boring machines (TBMs), ordered from Germany’s Herrenknecht AG but manufactured in Guangzhou, China, have been stuck in Chinese customs for eight months. The delay has frozen progress on a critical 12-kilometer undersea tunnel, marking the project’s ninth major setback. The Stuck Machines The TBMs were supposed to arrive in India by October 2024. Instead, they sit in a bonded warehouse in Guangzhou, with no clear timeline for release. India’s National High-Speed Rail Corporation (NHSRC) blames Beijing for “deliberate obstruction,” while Chinese authorities remain silent. The Mumbai-Ahmedabad corridor—India’s first bullet train, modeled on Japan’s Shinkansen—was supposed to slash travel time between the two cities from 7 hours to 2. Funded largely by a ¥1.25 trillion ($15 billion) Japanese loan at 0.1% interest over 50 years , the project was sl...

Open-Source Intelligence Analysis of the 2025 India-Pakistan Military Standoff

  In the recent India-Pakistan standoff, open-source intelligence (OSINT) channels have played an extremely important role in information dissemination and intelligence analysis. Various open-source platforms, including social media, commercial satellite imagery, vessel and aviation tracking data, news reports, and military forums, have collectively formed a "second front" for battlefield situational awareness, helping all parties to promptly understand and verify the dynamics of the conflict. However, the reliability of different OSINT channels varies, and it is necessary to cross-reference them to obtain the most accurate intelligence possible. Below is an analysis of the main channels: Social Media (Twitter/X, Facebook, etc.) Social media platforms are among the fastest sources for disseminating information about the conflict. A large number of first-hand witnesses, journalists, and even soldiers post photos, videos, and written reports through social media. For example, r...

A Historic Moment: The US-China Geneva Joint Statement

  Today, many friends have left messages in the backend, asking me to discuss the US-China Geneva Joint Statement and what it means. Let’s get straight to the conclusion: with the announcement of this statement, today has become a historic moment. But why do I say that? Let’s first look at the main content of the statement. The US has committed to canceling the 91% tariffs that were imposed on April 8th and 9th. The 34% and 24% tariffs imposed on April 2nd will be suspended for 90 days, with only 10% retained. We are doing the same: canceling the 91% retaliatory tariffs, suspending the 34% and 24% tariffs imposed on April 2nd for 90 days, and retaining 10%. In simple terms, both sides are returning to the status quo before Trump announced the “reciprocal tariffs” on April 2nd, and then each adding an additional 10%. How should we view this outcome? Let’s first look at what Bercow said before heading to Geneva. He stated that he didn’t expect to reach any agreement with the Chinese ...