The US government has put out the call for NATO members to join in the protection of the Strait of Hormuz from the retaliation of Iran after being attacked. But so far, the call has fallen on deaf ears. The main reason for the lack of support is that NATO is a defensive organisation and the majority of the members were not consulted prior to the attacks and the war is considered illegal. And of course, Trump in response to the lack of response has said it will mean "bad things for the future of NATO", as he has threatened before anyway. The thing is, NATO is there to prevent conflict, not escalate or maintain it, so for support to come, it would require a ceasefire of some sort first.
Finland only recently joined NATO, something that I was against due to it being a mechanism of the US and the fact that the EU has its own defence alliances if attacked. The primary reason for so much support in Finland at the time, was and still is Russia, considering there is a very long shared border. However, that support has slipped a bit since the US has been going on the offensive globally in the last year and treating its trade allies very poorly indeed. And I think that while Finland is in it for a long time, the questions are starting to be asked if NATO is the organisation it was or should be.
I think the disruption over the past year has been good for the world, because it is making it very clear that there is not an "in this together" ecosystem and that the US is only going to work in its perceived best interests, with the perception that money is all that matters. As a result, the world has become an increasingly violent place, with all manner of conflicts increasing, whether it be militarily or economically. This forces adaptation, which means looking for new ways to operate, new systems, new channels, new business, new alliances.
As I see it, the EU should be investing into itself and building up local capabilities across all sectors, rather than relying on the US to provide. Goods and services from the US should be taxed appropriately and fully locally where the money is earned, and those goods and services should be increasingly replaced by local alternatives, even if they are not "as good" to begin with. This is because being reliant on the US across sectors leaves the EU open to attack, becoming a slave to its will. The sooner this reliance can be reduced the better, and the more it gets reduced, the weaker the global grip the US has on the rest of the world.
No matter what the country, power corrupts. And the more power individual countries have, the more they will abuse it to grab more power. And for the last ninety-odd years, this is what the US has done and with Trump at the helm, the mask has started to come off faster to expose what most people knew was there all along. Corruption, greed and a desire for more control over everything and everyone. Even in the US, this has become the norm, where people's freedoms are increasingly being encroached upon as they are forced to accept the new normal.
At some point, Trump's presidency ends, however this doesn't mean there is a return to the previous conditions, because that "new normal" takes precedence. And that is a world where the US can no longer be trusted to be a force of good or even best interest of the western world, which means that the rest of the world has to step up and look after itself. As far as the EU goes, there is plenty of potential to ramp up all sectors, including military, as there is plenty of skill and talent to support it. It will take a little time to make the switch, but with the way technology is progressing now, it won't ,take as long as it would have in the past.
And what is interesting is that one of the reasons that the US is so strong with innovation is because they can afford to attract the talent, by milking the rest of the world. If for instance the EU would tax US corporations locally and fully, the profit model for the US service companies especially, changes drastically. When profit margins are reduced, investment capital looks elsewhere, and once that happens, the talent starts to move with it, and the innovation speed increases further. And as that investment potential starts to be spent in Europe, the conditions in Europe become more attractive to live and work, especially since the corporate culture is nowhere near as cutthroat as it is in the US:
The current actions the US highlights why centralisation is such a risk and should be avoided if possible. Centralised authorities wield too much power and will increasingly forget about supporting and maintaining the peripheries. The US is working much like the monopoly of a communist state, where resources are used in an increasingly tight circle, and there is no end to the hunger for more control. It never ends well, and I think that it isn't going to end well for the US either, but people are only really thinking in the short-term of where this leads, and what happens after.
Central authorities always corrupt and fail.
But we live in a world where people are mostly caring for themselves right now and maybe tomorrow. There is little thought put toward what it means for our children or grandchildren, and what the pathway looks like along the way. As I see it, the trend is downward as a society across so many important metrics and it is going to get to the point where the daily life of nearly everyone is negatively affected. If we are honest with ourselves, we are likely all already negatively affected, because profitability comes before wellbeing and the quest for power is the only thing that matters to those who have our resources to chase it.
We can ignore it all, keep our heads down and buried in the sand, but when the world burns, it doesn't matter who started it, or who should put it out, if left unattended like a festering wound, it is going to consume us all.
Taraz
[ Gen1: Hive ]
Be part of the Hive discussion.
And you may be rewarded.
