Finian Cunningham – Strategic Review Sept 24, 2024
Two key posts – in foreign and defense policy – reveal the militarist and anti-Russia direction of the European Union.
Ursula Von der Leyen, the president of the European Commission – which works as the executive branch of the European Union – announced her new team of commissioners for the next five years.
Taking over as foreign affairs minister for the 27-nation bloc is Kaja Kallas who is a staunch Russophobe and vigorous supporter of Ukraine. Kallas has called for more EU and NATO military funding for Ukraine to “defeat Russia” and the break up of the Russian Federation.
The former Estonian prime minister has led the movement to destroy Soviet Red Army monuments across the Baltic states. (This is while her investor husband continues to profit from doing business with Russia.)
Working closely alongside Kallas will be another rabid Russophobe, the former Lithuanian prime minister Andrius Kubilius, who is taking up a newly created EU post as defense commissioner. The creation of that post is an alarming sign of how the EU bloc has transitioned from a trade and political union to a military organization.
But what’s even more alarming is the assigning of such an anti-Russia hawk as Kubilius to oversee military policy.
At a time when relations between the EU and Russia have become so fraught with tensions, the European bloc is giving politicians from hostile Baltic states a driving seat to push relations even further towards conflict.
Indeed, the first announcement Kubilius made as the prospective new defense commissioner was that the European Union would likely be at war with Russia in the next six to eight years. That assessment is shared by Kaja Kallas.
Kubilius said the sole focus during his tenure is ramping up military spending by the EU nations to boost NATO and aid Ukraine. He said that he will be working closely with foreign policy chief Kallas to tap funds.
What this means is that the European Union is moving towards making it mandatory for national budgets to allocate more to military procurement. That’s a breakthrough for all the worst reasons.
Kubilius is reportedly aiming for a budget of €500 billion over the next five years to be spent on the military by the EU.
That increase would represent about half of the projected EU total budget.
His comments indicate the purpose of the massive redirection of finances – to boost NATO. Kubilius noted that “the European Union has instruments to get larger financing, which NATO doesn’t.”
That implies that under his formulation and compulsory directives from Brussels, the EU will make it mandatory for member states to spend more on the military.
NATO and the EU have overlapping membership with 23 members of the EU’s 27 also being part of the U.S.-led military alliance. Non-NATO members are Austria, Cyprus, Malta, and Ireland.
NATO states are expected to spend a minimum of 2 percent of their GDP on military. That amounts to about $380 billion for European members of NATO in 2024. That is a huge increase compared with what was spent by these members only a few years ago. But what the NATO planners want is more and more going forward. The problem is locking that expenditure in.
The trouble for NATO planners is the 2 percent figure is not mandatory. It is subject to national policy. While most members of NATO are hitting that target currently, there is no guarantee it will continue. Changes in national governments might result in spending slipping back to former levels of 1-1.5 percent of GDP as was the case before the proxy war in Ukraine blew up in 2022.
What the NATO hawks in the EU desire most is to lock in military spending year-on-year. NATO does not have the legal means to enforce such a commitment as mandatory on its members. But the EU can do it through its supranational powers as served by centralized directives from Brussels.
The Baltic states of Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia have upped their military spending to nearly 3 percent of GDP when Kallas and Kubilius were in office.
Moreover, Kubilius has previously proposed that all EU members devote an extraordinary, additional 0.25 percent of their GDP to make mandatory military donations to Ukraine to “ensure victory over Russia”, amounting to €100 billion a year.
This is an astounding transformation of the European Union. The organization has its roots in the 1950s as a loose trade federation of Western European nations – principally France and the Federal Republic of Germany – which proclaimed that lessons of the Second World War had been learned and would never be repeated because of commitments to good neighborliness and commercial partnership. In its earlier incarnations, the European bloc sought out friendly relations with the Soviet Union, primarily with energy trade being a cornerstone of cooperation.
Since the supposed end of the Cold War in 1991, the EU has expanded in line with the expansion of NATO. Its powers have become evermore centralized and usurping national policy. A striking feature of both NATO and the EU is the hardening of Russophobic policy that has come with the leveraging of anti-Russia Baltic states. Historically, these states were virulent collaborators with Nazi Germany in its genocidal war against the Soviet Union. The Baltic states still harbor fascists who venerate the Third Reich. Hence, the destruction of Soviet-era war monuments and the rehabilitation of public displays commemorating Nazi collaborators.
NATO’s proxy war in Ukraine against Russia is the continuation of Western imperialist designs on subjugating Russian territory that was previously pursued by Nazi Germany.
The European Union has subverted its earlier ideals of pacifism and cooperation to become part of NATO’s war machine. Crucially, what the EU brings to the war machine is legalized enforced funding, even for nations that are not part of NATO.
Added to that is the EU is being directed by people who drool about war with Russia: Von der Leyen, the former German defense minister and descendant of Nazi ideologues, is aided and abetted by Kaja Kallas and Andrius Kubilius who cannot think of Russia without fantasizing about its “defeat”.
The Nazi specter is resurrected in NATO and its EU financial wing.
Ursula Von der Leyen and Kaja Kallas – two overrated tarts who should have stayed home. These two are perfect examples why “the west” is going down the drain. Women should definitely not have the vote and should definitely not be in politics.
“The Nazi specter is resurrected in NATO and its EU financial wing.” Tell me Finian Cunningham , do you know any “nazis”, did you ever see one or meet one? No? I thought not yet you think you know what a “nazi” is. A “nazi” was a jew inspired slur word for the NSDAP who never used the term to describe themselves.
And it’s NO coincidence that that photo features two clueless cnts.. who don’t know what f’kin day it is… which seems to be a REQUIREMENT for High Office in the (((West))) today..
even though, to give credit where it’s due, the one on the right looks like she could suck the chrome of a ’67 Chevy Malibu tailpipe… and be quite happy doing it!!
… which is more – a LOT more! – that can be said for the slags, hags & bags not only in Starmer’s ‘Inner Sanctum but across the board in ‘The Parliament Of Whores’!
If a Russian nuke flew over their heads and they knew in just seconds they would evaporate in the blast before they could get somewhere safe they would both scream in terror. Clearly they’re not even thinking about it, because in every war that’s gone before the elites don’t often die in them. Not so the next one.
From the middle to the end author uses the Nazi word four times. We are used to have delusional paranoid mental patients in the comment section but now they write articles for Strategic Culture. How do you associate anti-white, anti-national policy of open borders, puppet females (and trannies) in positions of power, glorification of sodomy and discrimination of White males with the Third Reich? This is not a case of intellectual contortionism, it’s a case of lack of intellect. The author fell for a very obvious blame-shifting facade.
All wars are Jew banker’s wars. We tend to think they want one warring side destroyed and the other side victorious, in some case that is true. However there is another more complicated stratagem in which they want both warring sides destroyed, this is the only way to truly understand WWII.
In the last World War there were three nations targeted for destruction by the Jewish financial hydra, Japan and Germany obviously, and a third nation that perhaps was the main target of the war – the British Empire. Germany never was an economic power house like the later, their Navy was small. Germany is a young nation compared to millenary European Kingdoms. The unification of Germanic peoples happened in 1871. Japan had more history but was basically a rural society without industrial technology, until America brought them some in the 19th century. The British nationalistic Empire was a real threat for the Jew World Order.
Interesting to note that one of Hitler’s peace proposals declared that Germany would not oppose the British Empire, it could peacefully coexist with the Third Reich, unsurprisingly the puppet madman Churchill was uninterested. Chamberlain is the real hero of the British people and the Jews murdered him. Few weeks after Chamberlain presented his appeasement papers the Jews designed a counterattack, the Kristallnacht. The lying Jewish media could then spin the story the way they wanted. Germans were infuriated that their ambassador had been murdered in cold blood by a filthy Jew. Chamberlain’s political position became fragile. Hitler actually ordered the attacks on Jewish shops to stop but the situation got out of control. Jews probably collected insurance money after the crisis.
From the bankers point of view Germany never meant to be. They gave them rope to hang themselves. They financed Hitler not because he was a traitor, that’s false. They financed Germany enough to be a formidable opponent to the British Empire, but not enough to win the war. In the end the British Empire was dismantled. Britons had what is called a Pyrrhic victory, in a completely unnecessary war designed by Jewish bankers.
Fast-forward to the present. By analogy if this is a chess game, the financial hydra is doing the same play. Russia is targeted for complete and utter destruction and for the main target, America, a Pyrrhic victory.
There is no good reason for Europe to be hostile towards Russia: the oil pipe-line to Germany was a good example of co-operation, ruined, we think, only by America, and if we are not friends to Russia, then China and Islamic countries are more likely to be (and they are foreign, whereas Russians are us)
they are all crazy men + women not taking in
consideration that this wars today + in future
will be only + mainly wars against the civilian
population . soldiers are out of date . only useful
as joystick controlers of missiles + as occupation force .
Get a load of the two smarmy whores in the photo, apparently proud to be part of the degradation and destruction of Jewrope. Of course, what they deserve for their stupidity, treachery, and treason is to be thrown into the street, stripped naked, have their kneecaps, elbows, and wrists shattered, get vigorously and violently sodomized six ways from Sunday by mobs of frothy nigger Orc invaders and randy degenerates from Jewkraine, dragged through the streets by their ankles, rolled in pig shit and salt, then one of them stuffed in a small cage and left to rot while the other is hanged in front of the Jewropean Jewnion building in Brussels.