'There Is No Going Back': The Inside Story of Europe's Rupture with America

AAlien1Being about 2 hours ago 10 commentsRead Article on wsj.com

DE version is available. Content is displayed in original English for accuracy.

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion Sentiment

38% Positive

Analyzed from 651 words in the discussion.

Discussion (10 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

david422•26 minutes ago

I think the silver lining here is that decentralizing power from America is a good thing, for the world, long term.

bryanlarsen•12 minutes ago

If I had to pick a global hegemon, America is probably a better choice than most. But "no global hegemon" seems even better.

The last 80 years have been exceptionally peaceful compared to the rest of history, so I hope it continues despite America's loss of hegemon status.

holowoodman•10 minutes ago

No, it isn't imho.

After the cold war has ended, the western nations focused on not giving a fuck about military strength, allies or facing opponents the size of Russia or China. Instead some small-time infantry campaigns like Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan were started and then basically abandoned without any decisive result or even with a total failure. But even back in the 2000s, there were no common goals and no real alliances, just some commitments to save face and keep up appearances.

So now, Russia in Ukraine and Iran in the Persian Gulf have called the bluff that is Western military power and decisiveness. I'm guessing those were just the first instances of a long line of wars that should have been prevented by the US-lead West, that are now possible because the West is fractured and aimless.

baron3dl•14 minutes ago

It will be interesting to see if Pax Europa can hold, or if the continent will return to its historically consistent belligerence.

kown7•10 minutes ago

At least historically, this isn't supported. I'd refer to Sarah Paine's talks for more details.

More fault lines and pirates and no one to police them.

everdrive•33 minutes ago

We're paying a very high cost, but it's not something that regular Americans will notice in their day-to-day lives, which will likely mean that perception of the problem will continue to fall across ideological lines.

Either way, we're in an age of decline and fracture.

petcat•22 minutes ago

I think the biggest issue is that Europe and the EU has gotten themselves into a position where they don't actually offer much anymore except a pretty good middle class consumer market. They've put themselves into a place where they are just very easy to squeeze, which is what is happening from all sides by Russia, China, and the US.

Trump's antics have accelerated that position, and maybe they weren't expecting it from USA, but it was probably inevitable given their long term trajectory.

HarHarVeryFunny•38 minutes ago

Trust is slow to build, quick to destroy.

It wouldn't make any strategic sense for Europe to wait it out and see what happens next, and no doubt it has been a wake-up call to see how quickly the US can pivot from friend to adversary.

Once Europe has severed reliance on US, then it is hard to see them reverting.

shmeeed•about 1 hour ago

http://archive.today/Ujf4C

lateralux•about 1 hour ago

Europe is finally breaking with America ? At least this time, nobody has to try invading France first ^^

paulsutter•20 minutes ago

From the article:

> The new year was only three weeks old and President Trump, after removing Venezuela’s autocratic strongman, had briefly threatened to seize Greenland from Denmark.

Did Trump threaten to seize Greenland? The WSJ links to an article with the quotes below. The quotes reflect sheer buffoonery (as expected), but so far I haven't seen the threat to seize Greenland.

This seems to be the consensus, but its not clear to me that it happened.

From the linked article:

> During an hourlong speech at the World Economic Forum, the U.S. president said he wouldn’t deploy the military to take control of Greenland.

> It was a stark shift in tone for Trump, who just days earlier had declined to rule out using the military to secure ownership of Greenland and posted an image online of the territory with an American flag plastered across it.

> “I don’t have to use force,” he said. “I don’t want to use force. I won’t use force.”

> “We want a piece of ice for world protection, and they won’t give it,” Trump said of his desire to acquire Greenland from Denmark. “You can say yes, and we will be very appreciative. Or you can say no, and we will remember.”

josefritzishere•35 minutes ago

This was directly caused by a US regime which can only operate transactionally and cannot itself be trusted. Trust is highly perishable.

Supermancho•27 minutes ago

I think this is overly simplistic. Trump 2.0 was certainly the catalyzing event, but the issue is one of US political failure. Europe could have forgiven a corrupt regime that had an opportunity to be changed out, and was, when it became destructive to European interests. However, there is no recourse today. The US political system has demonstrated that it's corruptible and toothless in the face of authoritarian overreach, regardless of the systemic support that had to be in place for the administration to be so effectively destructive. This is the issue that is irreversible, in the long term. This will happen again, sooner rather than later.

twirlip•31 minutes ago

So Putin's failure in Ukraine is balanced by his wild success in the US. The eye-watering corruption of Trump and the Republican Party has irreversibly damaged relations with the democratic allies of the US.