Europeans must recognize US, China and Russia are ‘dead against’ us, says Macron
https://www.politico.eu/article/emmanuel-macron-warns-europe-unity-against-us-china-russia/
https://www.politico.eu/article/emmanuel-macron-warns-europe-unity-against-us-china-russia/
93 Comments
CyberEgg@discuss.tchncs.de · 77 pts · 101d
Fuck Politico, Axel Springer and Döpfner. Don't share, don't click.
https://discuss.tchncs.de/post/55154354
IEatDaFeesh@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 100d
But it's politico.eu so it must be ok.
CyberEgg@discuss.tchncs.de · 9 pts · 100d
No, it's all owned by the same publisher.
sukhmel@programming.dev · 4 pts · 99d
I think, it was sarcasm. But indeed, fuck them publishers
dudesss@lemmy.ca · 2 pts · 99d
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axel_Springer_SE
bridgeburner@lemmy.world · 48 pts · 100d
Wouldn't say China is 'dead against' the EU. China just does stuff which benefits them the most, I wouldn't say they have an inherent resentment towards the EU. And unlike the US, I believe China sees that the EU is a viable partner economically and that they would do themselves a disfavour if they were damaging those relations. Something the US doesn't understand, they just continue to isolate themselves further and further and suffer the consequences.
TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world · 18 pts · 100d
The EU's concern is that if China becomes too dominant, their authoritarian politics could permeate across.
However, you are right about from China's pov. They want to trade and be left alone (although, that doesn't mean that China may one day not try to exert wider influence). They are trying to revive the concept of China being the centre of the world. For the Chinese, they call their country "Zhongguo" meaning "Middle Kingdom". And before the European/Western dominance, countries were dying to form diplomatic and trade relations with China, which China kinda takes advantage of by demanding tributes from states who want to open relations. China knows they are the deal.
HrabiaVulpes@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 100d
Well, USA is quite dominant and their imperial politics have been permeating across the world for quite some time.
Europe should probably focus inwards and try to gain more independence from outside actors. EU can do it, mostly, it just doesn't want to because milions of voters cannot outvote a lobbying company.
TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 100d
With the current nation state model, people tend to side with the "lesser evil". Before the second coming of Trump, people surveyed around the world expressed more favourable view of USA than China, although they trust neither.
HrabiaVulpes@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 100d
Yeah. Democracy kinda forces lesser evil, no? Like you can't find politician that has platform of any value to you, but everyone tells you to vote regardless, so you end up voting for whoever looks like a lesser evil.
MousePotatoDoesStuff@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 100d
If you can't find a politician close enough to your values, become one (or support someone you trust in doing so)
73ms@sopuli.xyz · 1 pts · 99d
I'd say form of governance beyond every person being isolated and only ruling themselves forces lesser evil, it's very unlikely that any two people would always be in perfect alignment on every single conceivable issue. Of course in some systems you don't get a say you so you don't get to pick the option that you're the most aligned with at all.
mojofrododojo@lemmy.world · 14 pts · 100d
I'd also add: china wants european customers, and brands, a lot more than they want anything from the US.
Doomsider@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 100d
The US is in an unspoken alliance with Russia and China. It is the new axis of evil and the EU should be very concerned.
marxismtomorrow@lemmy.today · -16 pts · 100d
Doomsider@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 100d
The US has been supporting Russia for a long time now and has also been in bed with China forever.
China is the fourth largest producer of arms providing weapons of murder to war torn regions. They are great because of US not despite it. With their new billionaire class they are looking a lot like a one-party version of the US government.
The EU is no saint as their policies have been linked to massive deaths and their member nations also supply arms used to kill civilians. I am unaware of EU wars killing so many people. This sounds like some pretty bizarre Russian propaganda.
marxismtomorrow@lemmy.today · 0 pts · 100d
Doomsider@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 100d
I am not from the EU. Your saying that European soldiers raped Africans? Or are you saying that historically countries from the EU with their imperialistic designs have caused massive suffering? I think the later is common knowledge amongst people who care about these topics.
France almost invaded? So they tried and failed to maintain imperialistic control and Russia has stepped in. Both China and Russia have greatly increased their imperialistic presence in Africa supplying these country with arms that are used to kill civilians.
I am not sure you really supported you statement about EU soldiers causing deaths. I am sure EU nations and the USA will be happy to supply arms to the opposing sides in these countries thus enabling the cycle of destruction by imperialistic powers as they fight for control. Making money off of both sides in the conflict are the arms dealers, they are the real winners.
Saarth@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 99d
You're getting down voted only because most people on this platform are from US and Europe.
While I get what Putin is doing now is indefensible, I have not heard a single explanation as to why Russia has been excluded from NATO and EU. Nor have I understood the western paranoia regarding China. And all I can surmise from this is that US and Europe have continued their exploitation of poor countries through corporations and tried to exclude Russia, China and their allies from the global order.
Skua@kbin.earth · 0 pts · 99d
Both the EU and NATO require unaminous approval of existing members to add new members. Both organisations contain several members that have been under Russian domination within living memory. Given Russia's frequent aggression towards its neighbours in the post-Soviet period, why would the likes of the Baltic countries trust Russia to be a reliable ally?
Additionally, Russia just straight up does not meet the Copenhagen criteria to join the EU and doesn't have any measure of the pre-accession integration that every other applicant does
Saarth@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 98d
Yeah colonialism and military conquest is only bad when it's done to you, not when it's done by you.
And as for the Copenhagen criteria are there any metrics that can be used to determine whether a country is a functioning market economy or politically stable enough, or is it just a set of vague guidelines to keep the membership limited to whoever they like?
Skua@kbin.earth · 1 pts · 98d
Who said anything about colonialism and conquest not being bad? Countries seek to defend themselves. Russia has consistently been a threat to several EU and NATO states, therefore they seek defences against it
They don't need guidelines to do that. Any member state can just say no
Saarth@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 95d
My comment on colonialism was in response to you mentioning Russia's historical conquest of Eastern Europe. European countries were busy colonising other parts of the world during the same time so they're not better than Russia.
cows_are_underrated@feddit.org · 11 pts · 100d
Is there really not a better source for this? Politico is part of Axel Springer press, which is inherently right wing and constantly spreading lies.
CAVOK@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 100d
Maybe? I read the article, checked if a similar article had been posted already, it hadn't so...
Start posting interesting articles from sources you think are good and perhaps the amount of politico articles goes down?
I don't get why politico is singled out though. Plenty of cunts own newspapers.
poVoq@slrpnk.net · 7 pts · 100d
If you make posts with links to newspapers owned by Rupert Murdock you will get similar pushback, and that is a good comparism, just that how bad Axel Springer is, is lesser known outside German speaking countries.
voidemu@feddit.org · 0 pts · 98d
If a similar article hasn't been published by anyone else but a right-wing propaganda machine there might be a reason. Just saying...
BallyM@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 101d
Greek gov commits to waste billions on warships—that’s the story.
voidemu@feddit.org · 6 pts · 99d
Fuck politico and all the Springer press
dudesss@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 99d
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axel_Springer_SE
dudesss@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 99d
https://discuss.tchncs.de/post/55154354
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axel_Springer_SE
hanrahan@slrpnk.net · 3 pts · 99d
none of them are allies, Russia is an enemy,
USA may well be and detanglement should be a priority but certainly the US is no longer an ally or friend. China is in the neither enemy or friend basket, much like Vietnam, Brazil etc.
silverneedle@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 99d
Oh great, Euro-nationalism. No, sorry, we are well on track to being the continued lapdog of the US and this sorry excuse of a chauvinism won't change anything.
alessandro@lemmy.ca · 3 pts · 99d
As not being lap dog of someone like?
USA: lapdog for billionaire
Russia/China being lapdog for each other as one wage war and the other profit from it?
There's no need for nationalism: Europe can do well with other decent countries, which are not Russia, USA, China and closeted allies (such Israel/India). Australia, Canada, Japan... basically any country of this planet which is not a dictatorship and,at very last, adhere to the International Criminal Court.
super_user_do@feddit.it · 0 pts · 99d
China is not against the EU. They have never done anything against us
frischkaesbagett@feddit.org · 8 pts · 99d
True, China is "for China", mainly looking to profit.
That however is an stretch where does "against" start?
alessandro@lemmy.ca · 5 pts · 99d
Like fueling, ICC's wanted criminal war, Putin's economy as he wages war on eastern Europe?
super_user_do@feddit.it · 0 pts · 99d
China does business with everyone and their position in the war is actually neutral. Xi Jinping is actually kinda pissed off by Putin since China had massive investments in Ukraine that have been destroyed, halted or ruined because of the war. China and Russia, in contrast of what is said in our media, are NOT allies. Or at least they are not allies as we mean it
alessandro@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 99d
PRC does business with everyone, criminals like Putin included, as EU does business with criminals like Netanyahu. Difference between neither Putin or Netanyahu can set foot in Europe, since they are wanted criminals by International Criminal Court.
Of course not, Putin does the war crimes, PRC does the business with said criminal. It's just business, you see.
...in league with war crimes but still, just, business.
Quittenbrot@feddit.org · 0 pts · 99d
So neutral that they still don't even call it war. So neutral. Wow.
China
doeswants to continue to do business with everyone and hence wants to sell the image of their position in the warisas being actually neutral while being knees deep in supporting Russia's war machine.^Fixed it for you
nlgranger@lemmy.world · -7 pts · 99d
Wow, the audacity of this bit**. Dude has literally been the lapdog of the US for over 10 years, undermining every single sovereign stuff we had.
plyth@feddit.org · -62 pts · 101d
The irony is that the tension with China and Russia originates from the US. The Ukraine war cannot be undone but there is less to forgive than the cruelty of WW 2. If we split from the US we could rebuild our relations with China and Russia.
That's why I believe that the tensions with the US are superficial. We don't act as if the US are dead against us. We play good cop, bad cop because it would be difficult to explain to European democracies that we support the war against Iran to limit the oil supply for China.
Two days ago the son of the Shah was in Berlin. At least Germany supports the regime change.
Axiochus@lemmy.world · 73 pts · 101d
Sure, except for the small imperialist invasion of Ukraine, Russia has been the most friendly and reliable partner for Europe. I wish we could forgive and forget 🥰
BestBouclettes@jlai.lu · 52 pts · 101d
Yeah and all the meddling and interference and financing far right parties and so on. They're definitely friendly !
MummifiedClient5000@feddit.dk · 46 pts · 101d
Unless of course you also count the decades of aggression and covert warfare against European countries (sabotage, psyops, cyberattacks etc).
But aside from that.....
Regna@lemmy.world · -6 pts · 101d
Whoosh
MummifiedClient5000@feddit.dk · 15 pts · 101d
OMG samesies ❤
FlordaMan@lemmy.world · 32 pts · 101d
After ww2 germany was occupied for years. I don’t think Russia should be let off the hook for what they are doing in Ukraine.
Kissaki@feddit.org · 13 pts · 101d
Germany became trustworthy and stable through democratic systems and the rule of law. OP pulling an equivalence to Russia of today is insane.
plyth@feddit.org · -17 pts · 101d
I am not pulling an equivalence. I am not saying that current Russia should be treated like current Germany. I am just saying that there can be reconsiliation. Russia's main demand is no Nato. If Europe can offer that because we split with America then we should check what Russia has to offer. Maybe Putin is willing to step down for it.
SupraMario@lemmy.world · 17 pts · 101d
Lol no...just no. NATO and Ukraine being magically run by nazis is just an excuse. Putin wants power and to rebuild the USSR.
https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna7632057
That was in 2005. The writing was on the wall, and no one believed it.
poVoq@slrpnk.net · 10 pts · 101d
"No Nato", but did you ask why "no Nato"? That has much less to do with the US, and much more to do with them trying to recover their previous imperial holdings in eastern Europe.
Of course you can argue these eastern European countries are now imperial holdings of western Europe in some ways, but they themselves overwhemingly prefer that than to be subject to Russian rule again.
Reconciliation with Russia is only possible when Russia stops being an aspiring empire, which is unlikely to happen any time soon.
plyth@feddit.org · -5 pts · 100d
How can Russia believe to win the necessary wars? People suggest that Russia can win the propaganda war in the EU to take enough countries out of the EU and then have no opposition when conquering the Baltics. But buying ads cannot beat owning the algorithm.
The strategic benefit of the Baltics for Russia is that defending is easier. It doesn't make sense to start a war to get them.
Russia doesn't oppose the EU with article 42. I think it's actually Nato and the influence of the US that they don't want.
poVoq@slrpnk.net · 7 pts · 100d
If there is no western European support (because for example Germany is ruled by the AfD, France by the FN and the UK by Reform... not exactly an unrealistic scenario right now, and the "algorithm" is helping them with that) then they can win, or at the very least pressure these smaller states to become vassals like Belarus is right now.
But even if you personally disagree that this is a realistic scenario, it doesn't change the fact that the large majority of the eastern European states believe so and thus will prevent any attempts at reconciliation with Russia on EU level.
plyth@feddit.org · -1 pts · 100d
The US control the social networks. That's not my personal preference but a fact.
If they believe that soon the EU won't protect them they would seek reconciliation immediately. They can only be aggressive towards Russia because they expect Russia to lose and to be dismantled.
Kissaki@feddit.org · 5 pts · 99d
This is bullshit. 'No NATO' is one of Russia's many lies, a talking point, a pushed narrative, a lie they used at some point. At the same time, Putin has publicly stated intention of getting control of UDSSR land "back".
NATO was never an enemy of a collaborative or just Russia. It was only opposition to military action.
Giving in to 'no Nato' is giving up on autonomy and on being able to defend, with all its consequences.
Today's USA under Trump is more of an ally to Russia than not. Trump is actively working for Putin and against Europe. It's just that the political and systematic environment protects us from worse, for now.
plyth@feddit.org · 1 pts · 99d
Do you have a source? I know there is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundations_of_Geopolitics with the author being close to Putin, and there is a quote in another comment in that direction. But it requires to win a war against Europe. That's not realistic.
Russia wanted to be part of Nato. Putin's speech in front of the German parliament in 2001 looks sincere to me. On the other hand chancellor Kohl's notes show that the West never had the intention to integrate Russia but they promised it.
There is article 42 of the EU. There is also nothing preventing Nato from officially fighting for Ukraine right now.
Deception. Trump would be impeached if that would be true. The US still have their base in Wiesbaden, they just let the EU pay for everything.
Putin would need a strong but independent EU against the US while the US needs a fractured EU to keep them paying and following their lead. Both support the right wing parties but with different goals.
Bullerfar@lemmy.world · 24 pts · 101d
Maybe the people, but haven't we learned by now you can't trust a dictatorship? No more trade relations with dictators..
CosmoNova@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 101d
You are absolutely right in that dictatorships are unreliable and will either stab you in the back when you cozy up to them or try to stab you in the front if you don‘t. Unfortunately there are too many people and especially politicians that can‘t let go of the status quo because they either profited massively from it or in other cases at least think they did. They don‘t realize or care that the dream of prosperity by giving dictators what they want is becoming more and more of a nightmare for of us.
Simply put I think too many people are selfish and don‘t believe tensions with autocracies are negatively affecting them.
Kissaki@feddit.org · 21 pts · 101d
Which relations specifically do you suggest we rebuild?
The Russia before the recent invasion was a Russia preparing for war. Russia has and had explicit pursued goals of destabilization of Europe and making Europe dependent. and Russia wants its UDSSR land and control back. The US isn't the problem in that relationship. I certainly don't want back into that trajectory.
China has its own voiced claims and seekings of foreign territories. They're fundamentally egoistic and pursuing control and dominance. It was an asymmetric trade, making use of the open European market while having a closed domestic market. They were stealing know-how and then used subsidization to weaken and drive out European competition. I don't want back onto that relationship and trajectory either.
We need new kinds of relations. And the US doesn't stand in the way of that. It's another party we need new kinds of relations with.
plyth@feddit.org · 1 pts · 98d
The relations of 2001 when Putin gave his speech to the German parliament. An economic union from Portugal till Vladivostok was on the table. Russia wants to be self-reliant now after we rejected that.
Aren't they justified to be cautious? If Europe could, we would treat them like Africa or the US like Latin America. Unlike the US we are already number two, so not much to lose if China becomes number one. Nobody knows how relations are if containment is not part of the equation.
Which kinds? Mercosur was not a full success.
Quittenbrot@feddit.org · 15 pts · 101d
And the government made clear there won't be an official meeting. Instead, he met with selected members of the Bundestag (parliament). What are you trying to say?
Kissaki@feddit.org · 6 pts · 101d
What they were saying is in the sentence following the one you quoted.
Of course, as you point out, they're making wrong assumptions or deliberately mislead. With that, what they were saying falls apart.
trollercoaster@sh.itjust.works · 3 pts · 101d
The way he is paraded around in the German media suggests strong political support, though.
Supporting the Shah is a bit of a political tradition in Germany, he was a well liked (by the political caste) state guest back in the day when he was running the regime in Iran. His state visits even gave the German language a new word: "Jubelperser" - "jubilant Persians", a euphemism for agents of his security service who would beat up counter demonstrators with iron rods under the watchful benevolent eyes of the German police.
Quittenbrot@feddit.org · 1 pts · 101d
Sure, there is strong political support for the idea of Pahlavi taking over again. But just not by 'Germany', as the user made it seem.
trollercoaster@sh.itjust.works · 3 pts · 100d
Important members of the biggest ruling party meeting with him suggests otherwise.
It's a whole lot of support while still allowing some deniability.
Quittenbrot@feddit.org · 1 pts · 100d
As far as I read, he met with several foreign affairs politicians from various parliamentary groups in the Bundestag. The only named participant I know of is CDU's Laschet. He was cited with "Of course I want to talk to Pahlavi, as he's a person of relevance when it comes to transition in Iran." Green's Nouripour said, while he himself wouldn't have attended that meeting, he yet thinks it is ok and even sensible of Laschet to speak with the various facets of Iranian opposition and that other members of his party will also attend the meeting. There are very critical voices from Laschet's party as well as other parties. At least I do not know what they actually discussed in that meeting, so I am cautious to blindly assume they fully supported him and did not voice any concerns. Meeting a political figure from abroad does not automatically equal supporting them.
plyth@feddit.org · 0 pts · 101d
What are you trying to say? That that isn't support? Laschet is the former chancellor candidate. That's the highest ranking member of the CDU that still allows some form of denial. Obviously it works but why? How can the meeting be interpreted any different but as support?
Quittenbrot@feddit.org · 2 pts · 101d
So? Laschet is the current chair of the Bundestag's Foreign Affairs Committee. Call me crazy, but I guess meeting with influential foreign political figures might have more to do with that than some election a couple of years ago.
And while he might support Pahlavi, not even his party is unanimously doing so. Meetings of political figures can also be used to voice concerns and criticism.
Hence, to insinuate that Germany supports him is at best uninformed, at worst malicious.
plyth@feddit.org · 2 pts · 100d
Of course, the meeting can be held for the personal goals of Laschet but how likely is that? Current chair of the Bundestag’s Foreign Affairs Committee, it can't be much more official while the war is illegal.
Quittenbrot@feddit.org · 2 pts · 100d
No one here said that. When the current chair of the Bundestag’s Foreign Affairs Committee meets such a person (together with foreign affairs politicians from other parties), the most obvious reason for that meeting would be their respective function in foreign affairs.
Given the criticism from across a plethora of parties - involved and uninvolved - and the clear message by the government to not meet him, your statement of 'Germany' supporting is false: either uninformed or malicious.
plyth@feddit.org · 1 pts · 99d
The government doesn't meet Pahlavi because it looks bad. How does it not look bad if somebody else meets him who has deep ties to the government?
Quittenbrot@feddit.org · 2 pts · 99d
Problem is that you keep on filling the circumstances with your own personal opinions/assumptions and then confuse these for facts. It is your choice to interpret these things in the most negative way possible or suspecting a conspiracy/"something bigger", but don't be surprised if others won't follow you on that path and grow tired of you trying to keep that wheel spinning.
The facts are: the government explicitly stated they won't meet Pahlavi. Pahlavi met with foreign affairs politicians / members of the Bundestag from various parties. These parties also raised concerns about this meeting. Laschet himself was cited with “Of course I want to talk to Pahlavi, as he’s a person of relevance when it comes to transition in Iran.” Details of this meeting and participants beyond Laschet are not known.
Yet, for you this is all clear and you'll happily interpret it as a sign of support. Not only by Laschet, but the whole of Germany. What's there left to say to that?
Tryenjer@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 100d
Fuck Russia. Putin and his oligarchs are a snake that nobody can trust.
marxismtomorrow@lemmy.today · -6 pts · 100d
Tryenjer@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 100d
LoL This is completely ridiculous. It was a bunch of Russian oligarchs who put Putin on the Kremlin throne thinking they had a passive pawn, but instead ended up becoming the puppets themselves. After the fall of the USSR, most of the countries that comprised it did not develop into the despotic, revanchist, chauvinistic, and increasingly totalitarian country that Russia is today.
The attempt at Westernization in all the former Soviet republics in Europe also occurred, but it did not have the devastating consequences that the Russians experienced. The benchmark for what went really wrong in Russia is different and comes from within.
Alcoholicorn@mander.xyz · -15 pts · 101d
100% this. Its crazy to see the mental gymnastics America's vassals do to explain how a decision that fucks them over and benefits the US/hurts our enemies was actually good for Europe.
IDK about rebuilding your relationship with Russia tho, your and their national bourgeois have such conflicting interests, and even if they wanted peace, they can’t stop the fascists in either country.
plyth@feddit.org · -3 pts · 101d
What are the conflicts? I thought the classic threat to the US is Russian resources and German engineering. Add the full EU to that and a single economic zone from Portugal to Vladivostok would become the central market of the world. The bourgeois must like that.
Alcoholicorn@mander.xyz · 2 pts · 101d
The Euro bourgeois want cheap resources, Russia has cheap resources. A developed Russia means expensive resources.