| |
| ▲ | iammjm a day ago | parent | next [-] | | I don't think the relations with USA will be normalized anytime soon, at least not to what they were before Trump. Trust is difficult to build and easy to destroy. Once it is destroyed, it is even more difficult to be rebuilt. Europeans will never forget the US irrationality, unpredictability, and the backstabbing. US threatened to invade Europe, to cut Europe from critical technology, and to sell it to Russia. That's not something that just gets forgotten quickly. US and Europe will likely continue to be allies and to cooperate, but the relationship will be MUCH more equal and adversarial going forward. | | |
| ▲ | thisislife2 a day ago | parent [-] | | - Trust is difficult to build and easy to destroy. Here you are assuming that the European politicians do not know what the US administration wants and is doing - they are just doing political theatrics for their public, while maintaining close ties with the US. The European superpowers (and the emerging powers) are very much part of this political idea of a stronger NATO as they agree with their Anglosphere partners (Five Eyes) that to challenge a united Russia and China in the future, a stronger military is very much required. Trump is an easy (and willing) target to blame for the "public breakdown" in relationship - note that nobody in Europe is politically disparaging the whole of the US for this, which would be much harder to politically repair. | | |
| ▲ | illiac786 18 hours ago | parent [-] | | I disagree. “American” has gained a very negative connotation in my circle of friends. And there are more and more politicians openly anti-US (not just anti-Trump). Mostly opposition, smaller parties, yes. Big players are too afraid of what they have to lose, and while I can’t read their mind, I can’t imagine this shift hasn’t reached them too. They’re just hiding it out of fear. Politicians may often be self-interested, but in general less so. And most importantly, they are emotional beings like the rest of the population. To think that their emotions are not impacted by two Trump mandates is naive. You think politicians are machines, self-interested with zero loyalties or emotions in general, literally a different species from the rest of the population. I think that’s far too simplistic. | | |
| ▲ | thisislife2 17 hours ago | parent [-] | | I think successful politicians have the talent to shape public opinions. If you have any negative perception of the US today, it is because of your politicians. Tomorrow, these same politicians can make you feel good about the US too, if they so desire to. | | |
| ▲ | illiac786 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | Then successful politicians are exceedlingly rare. Minds are shaped by algorithms and news, trust in politicians is very low. |
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | mint5 a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | To be clear, this is not 3d chess. The Trump admin and musk are not doing any of their antics out of a long term strategy. The longer term effects are all unintended consequences. | | |
| ▲ | tim333 21 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Trump's anti NATO moves started after he was flown by the KGB to Moscow in 1987 https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/11/19/trump-fir... after which he took out a full page ad and went on TV slagging NATO https://youtu.be/NSvdMiV33Ik It may not be US's long term strategy but could be Russia's. A pawn in their 3d chess maybe? | |
| ▲ | thisislife2 a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | There is no 3d chess here. In the US political system, the US President only has the power to shape foreign policy, and not to make or break it. True, Trump wields his powers crudely. But apart from his bombastic talks, have you seen any political action by him to suggest any major changes in US foreign policy? Not really, in my opinion. | | |
| ▲ | iammjm a day ago | parent | next [-] | | It did change drastically. Since the end of WW2 Russia has always been the #1 adversary for NATO, and now it looks like the US is siding with Russia for financial gain. Examples: US stopped supporting Ukraine financially, it delayed crucial ammunitions deliveries to Ukraine, it cut Ukraine off from Starlink, it sabotaged West's financial pressure on Russia. Also: it threatened to invade Greenland, it imposed absurd tariffs on Europe, it reduced the amount of troops and weaponry in Europe. It also showed it's incompetence and impotence in Iran, which weakened its projection of strength worldwide and thus also weakened NATO. This will take decades and a lot of effort to rebuild. | | |
| ▲ | thisislife2 21 hours ago | parent [-] | | Even with Russia, there is no real change in foreign policy - the NATO-Russia proxy war has outrun its course and it is better for Western interests that the war conclude now, before Russia gains more advantage. But of course, that also needs to be done without making any more major concession to Russia. That is why the US and Europe are currently playing the "good cop - bad cop" routine here with Russia, with the pretence that Trump has "abandoned" Europe / Ukraine in favour of Russia - if the Americans had really abandoned Ukraine, the Russia-Ukraine war would be over by now. Europe just doesn't have the military capabilities to support the war against Russia, like the US can. It is also beneficial to the Europeans that they aren't involved in the diplomatic talks with Russia (to end the conflict), as that provides US / NATO an excuse to not make any concessions in the European theatre (which is where Russia wants some actual changes). Keeping Europe away also provides the benefit that they can continue to maintain its cold war hostility with Russia, and demand further concessions from the Russians, to repair its relationship with them, post-war. Or worst case, to restart the war again in the future. (What is true is that Trump just doesn't like Zelensky because he supported Biden over him, and even campaigned against him, and still continues to undermine Trump. So he pettily undermines Zelensky at every opportunity - which plays well with the Russians too - knowing there is no political danger in it as any Ukrainian leader will be dependent on the West for the next decade or two.) It is however true that just as the Ukraine war has provided US / Trump a leverage to demand concessions from the Russians, the Iran war too has provided leverage to Putin / Russia to demand concession from the Americans. This is another reason why the US is forced to engage with the Russians. Here, Trump would willingly sacrifice some Ukrainian / European (short-term) interests, if need be, to protect US interests without having to worry about any real domestic oppositions to it. |
| |
| ▲ | tim333 a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | Backing a murderous dictatorship in its efforts to trample a peaceful democracy? It's a complete 180 from the traditional "leader of the free world" bit. I daresay that's just Trump who's a Putin fanboy / employee. In the rest of the US I think like 3% support Russia. |
|
|
|
