The South China Sea's Gathering Storm

[West Coast]

Originally Posted by Ninthace

Only part of Russia is part of Europe geographically speaking but it is not part of the EU whereas Hungary et al are. To save you the trouble, here is a list of the member states. You will note the UK is sadly not part any more.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Member...European_Union

Sorry but Europe and EU are not interchangeable terms.

[Ninthace]

Originally Posted by Video Mixdown

It’s pretty clear that Macron was talking about a European Military organisation under the leadership of France, not the EU and not NATO. You could argue that splitting most of continental Europe away from NATO, effectively destroying it, would be warmly welcomed in Moscow and Beijing.

I suspect the Chinese were more concerned about the EU siding with the US over Taiwan rather than Ukraine. Such action on the part of the EU would be economic rather than military since, as you say, the EU as an entity has no military to speak of and the the forces of the member countries are under the sovereign control of those states.

Originally Posted by West Coast

Sorry but Europe and EU are not interchangeable terms.

I never said they were but Macron has influence within the EU and that is 27 of the countries within Europe. By comparison, how many of the countries within Europe are not members of the EU or closely economically connected with them by to the point of accepting EU rules?

[West Coast]

Originally Posted by Ninthace

I never said they were but Macron has influence within the EU and that is 27 of the countries within Europe. By comparison, how many of the countries within Europe are not members of the EU or closely economically connected with them by to the point of accepting EU rules?

Let’s apply that to your nation first.

[Ninthace]

Originally Posted by West Coast

Let’s apply that to your nation first.

Apply what and why? Macron has precious little influence in the UK. What does any of that to do with China? Address the points raised in #1555 et seq instead of playing silly b*ggrs..

Seems the Torygraph agrees with my #1553

Emmanuel Macron has said Europe must not be a “follower” of the US agenda when it comes to tensions between China and Taiwan.

The French president made the remarks after returning to France following the conclusion of a three-day state visit to China last week.

“The question Europeans need to answer is the following: is it in our interest to accelerate [a crisis] in Taiwan? No. The worst thing would be to think that we Europeans must become followers on this topic and take our cue from the US agenda and a Chinese overreaction,” Mr Macron said.

[Xeptu]

Originally Posted by HOVIS

Airbus think otherwise...

https://www.reuters.com/business/aer...er-2023-04-06/

Europe is changing. I believe when Ukraine is liberated, it will, with Poland, become the power house of Europe, and the UK and the northern part of Europe will be part of it.
Airbus indeed France has a decision to make which doesn't include China. The western world has made it's decision and if southern Europe wants to be part of it, it better start making some decisions.

[West Coast]

Originally Posted by Ninthace

Seems the Torygraph agrees with my #1553

The US position is Taiwan’s independence must be respected. Is Macron’s position different?

[Sfojimbo]

Originally Posted by Ninthace

Seems the Torygraph agrees with my #1553

It seems like all the Britts agree with you. This reminds me of when Agrajag and his British friends attacked me when I first started posting here after I left the link to the KML file highlighting the railroad network in Ukraine. Some of you seem to have taken on the role of self appointed censors.

IMO Macron's comments are not at all limited to Asian events, they are a continuation of a 75 year continuous history of France working to undermine US influence in the world. Absent that history, yours and Torygraph's view might be correct. But you can't wave that 75 year history away with a motion of your hand.

BTW
THE (American) Wall Street Journal agrees with me that Macron has weakened US support for Europe.
"He weakens deterrence against Chinese aggression and undermines U.S. support for Europe."
https://www.wsj.com/articles/macron-...pport-303181c5

[Ninthace]

Originally Posted by West Coast

The US position is Taiwan’s independence must be respected. Is Macron’s position different?

I do not know. Publicly they are similar but I would question the depth of commitment of the US and Europe, with Macron’s influence, in terms of delivery on that promise. Would either of them actually take the bullet for Taiwan? Would either of them go to war over it? I suspect the US might push harder than Europe (depending on who is President) especially as Macron is already making the right noises from the Chinese perspective. But is this a quid pro quo for China taking a position on Ukraine and using its influence on Russia, as Macron asked them to?

[ExAscoteer2]

Who the F are the Britts?

[golder]

“the great risk” Europe faces is that it “gets caught up in crises that are not ours, which prevents it from building its strategic autonomy,”

Oh good. Next time there is a cat fight in Europe. Australia won't have to shed blood. To help save France and others.

Is there any chance? You could organise to send back the money and equipment we recently gave Ukraine? It's nothing to do with us.

[Ninthace]

Originally Posted by golder

Oh good. Next time there is a cat fight in Europe. Australia won't have to shed blood. To help save France and others.

I think the question now is rather the reverse. Would European countries shed blood over a cat fight in the Pacific. I suspect the answer would depend to some extent on how much Australian blood was being spilt and where, and to what extent European countries could make enough difference in time. Pretty sure the British would try but I cannot speak for the other countries. I am sure they would make an effort in economic terms but in actual hardware and bodies?

From both European and US perspectives, could Taiwan stand long enough for a military intervention to be made? Would such an intervention succeed? Would the cost be worth it? What are the risks of escalation? All way above my pay grade but presumably it is being considered in the relevant capitals

[golder]

Back off guys. You are only making work for the mods. Who will have to clean up the mess.Take it to PM.

[West Coast]

Originally Posted by Ninthace

I do not know. Publicly they are similar but I would question the depth of commitment of the US and Europe, with Macron’s influence, in terms of delivery on that promise. Would either of them actually take the bullet for Taiwan? Would either of them go to war over it? I suspect the US might push harder than Europe (depending on who is President) especially as Macron is already making the right noises from the Chinese perspective. But is this a quid pro quo for China taking a position on Ukraine and using its influence on Russia, as Macron asked them to?

Just what militarily could France do to oppose Chinese aggression? “Stop or I’ll yell stop again”. The only thing Macron can do (and it’s now) is reinforce the level of isolation China will suffer should it invade.

[fineline]

Originally Posted by Xeptu

Europe is changing. I believe when Ukraine is liberated, it will with Poland become the power house of Europe, and the UK and the northern part of Europe will be part of it.
Airbus indeed France has a decision to make which doesn't include China. The western world has made it's decision and if southern Europe wants to be part of it, it better start making some decisions.

Agree Xeptu, Poland and much of Eastern Europe, the Baltics, Scandinavia, the UK, USA, Japan, Australia, etc. are becoming increasingly aligned. France has a lot going for it, energy and food independent etc., but they are surely playing with fire by cosying up to the failing totalitarian states (note Macron's attempts to rehabilitate Putin last year), which are going to have a rough couple of decades quite likely involving some level of conflict between themselves (China and Russia that is, not France). It will be interesting to see which way Germany ends up leaning. India too - perhaps an emerging power player in their own right. The rest of Asia is also in play, although signs in the Phillipines, Vietnam etc. point to SE Asia seeing which way the wind is blowing.

These are interesting times, they will be very challenging for some parts of the world but as I suggested above, if you subjugate yourselves to a stagnant, belligerent totalitarian dictatorship that denigrates the very international system on which it relies, you're probably not going to achieve your full potential. Even if you're friends with France.

[Ninthace]

Originally Posted by West Coast

Just what militarily could France do to oppose Chinese aggression? “Stop or I’ll yell stop again”. The only thing Macron can do (and it’s now) is reinforce the level of isolation China will suffer should it invade.

Not just France but the states of Europe as a whole? They certainly do have forces to send to theatre but are they willing to place them under US control and would such a force be strong enough or quick enough to.be credible? Depending on timing and the prevailing situation in Europe, there may well be a lack of enthusiasm for such a venture. That is why I speculated about Macron’s motivation. Is it simply a recognition of this fact or is there something deeper? Has he agreed with China to take the line he has in return for China putting pressure on Russia?

[Xeptu]

Originally Posted by MechEngr

China is an economic threat because corporate America handed them all the required tools. The corporations could do that because they bought enough legislators and even a President to make sure it happened. Now the corporations are strip mining American wealth to invest even more in the growing Chinese economy and the legislators are making sure that continues to happen. On top of that US universities welcomed full-price foreign students, which also allowed tuition and student housing inflation, to train as competitors to the US to go back to China with top American technology insights.

The serious threat to the US is the US and the US alone.

If there is consideration for military threat from China - that won't happen until the US corps have drained the most they can from the US economy.

Sadly we did it too, we truly believed that both China and Russia would become a democratic and free world like us. Most of their young people want that, in Russia they even believed they had that, until Putin said, this is not a democracy, you are not free to do what you want and I'm in charge. The same can be said of China albeit China hasn't actually done anything all that seriously wrong yet, We believed it wouldn't make any sense and it doesn't. I still believe in a free trade market just not with a regime ever again.
It is true about democracy, it's not free, you have to want it, you have to fight for it and then you have to defend it. Welcome Ukraine, may it be over soon and you take your place with us.

[West Coast]

Originally Posted by Ninthace

Not just France but the states of Europe as a whole? They certainly do have forces to send to theatre but are they willing to place them under US control and would such a force be strong enough or quick enough to.be credible? Depending on timing and the prevailing situation in Europe, there may well be a lack of enthusiasm for such a venture. That is why I speculated about Macron’s motivation. Is it simply a recognition of this fact or is there something deeper? Has he agreed with China to take the line he has in return for China putting pressure on Russia?

The real threat China should fear from France and Europe is messaging of the level of isolation/loss of trade to expect should they invade. While French and other Euros military participation would be welcomed I’d have to think, as it would provide the ability to say it’s a coalition effort. As to the heavy lifting, I wouldn’t expect much from Europe.

[Senior Pilot]

Originally Posted by golder

Back off guys. You are only making work for the mods. Who will have to clean up the mess.Take it to PM.

Originally Posted by Sfojimbo

LOL
You can argue all alone with yourself from here on out.

I'll just watch.

What a shame that Sfojimbo didn’t just watch; Mods have better things to do on the Mil Forum than accept posts claiming that we’re biased in our Moderation.

Since you didn’t just watch, nor pay attention to golder then we’ll help you with a week off 🤔👍

[golder]

Originally Posted by Ninthace

I think the question now is rather the reverse. Would European countries shed blood over a cat fight in the Pacific. I suspect the answer would depend to some extent on how much Australian blood was being spilt and where, and to what extent European countries could make enough difference in time. Pretty sure the British would try but I cannot speak for the other countries. I am sure they would make an effort in economic terms but in actual hardware and bodies?

From both European and US perspectives, could Taiwan stand long enough for a military intervention to be made? Would such an intervention succeed? Would the cost be worth it? What are the risks of escalation? All way above my pay grade but presumably it is being considered in the relevant capitals

Going by Macaroon. I can only take him at his word. He said about Taiwan in the SCS "the great risk, [we] gets caught up in crises that are not ours"
They can ignore the others in the Pacific, if they wish. Abandon the existing world order....Does France not even care about, what's left of their Pacific colonies?

@Sfojimbo, FYI, I didn't report your post.

[West Coast]

Originally Posted by golder

Going by Macaroon. I can only take him at his word. He said about Taiwan in the SCS "the great risk, [we] gets caught up in crises that are not ours"

That’s scary especially given France was saved by nations who intervened in a crisis that wasn’t their own.