At no point in U.S. history has there been such a drastic foreign policy shift following a presidential transition. Within just three months after the November 5, 2024, elections, the U.S. moved from allowing ATACMS strikes deep into Russia—escalating hostility to the brink of mutual nuclear war rhetoric—to a rapid and abrupt détente after Trump’s return to office. This highlights the unstable and erratic nature of the American state system. Such extreme shifts are typically observed in collapsing empires.
This radical change is not solely due to Trump’s colorful and unpredictable personality. The U.S. bureaucracy was forced to acknowledge the collapse of the three-year political-military paradigm it had pursued with NATO and the EU against Russia via Ukraine. Despite seamless logistical transfers of war supplies from the American mainland to European ports and their integration into European war logistics, Russia did not back down. Had this war escalated to a stage where Russian submarines began targeting ships transporting military supplies to Ukraine across the Atlantic, leading to their sinking, Ukraine would have retreated much more quickly.
Ukraine has had to pay the price for serving the American neocon agenda of NATO expansion and the dismantling of Russia. Having received $177 billion in support from the U.S. and Europe, Zelensky sacrificed over 500,000 Ukrainian lives. More than 7 million Ukrainians fled the country. Ukraine lost its vast agricultural lands and areas rich in rare metals.
Ukraine’s vision of joining NATO and the EU has been de facto eliminated. By excluding the EU from Ukraine ceasefire/peace talks, the U.S. effectively declared that the EU had been relegated to second-tier status in the global geopolitical equation. This was an extremely humiliating move.
Zelensky, once welcomed as a national hero in the U.S., was not even invited to the most crucial meeting discussing his country’s fate. The U.S. is openly signaling, “I created you, and I will determine your destiny.” After being humiliated and effectively punished to such an extent before his own people, Zelensky will no longer be able to issue any meaningful strategic directives following today’s meeting.
Trump has declared that U.S. aid to Ukraine has no commercial return and has nearly laid claim to Ukraine’s $500 billion worth of rare metal reserves.
With its energy infrastructure in ruins and facing the risk of losing Odessa and access to the sea—potentially becoming landlocked—Ukraine’s deteriorating situation has been recognized by Trump and his team. Trump will turn Ukraine into a complete American colony in exchange for bringing peace.
Ukraine’s potential reaccess to cheap Russian energy, though a distant possibility, will depend on Trump’s negotiations with Russia. Trump will also determine how much European companies will be involved in Ukraine’s reconstruction.
There is talk of the need for at least 100,000 peacekeeping troops in Ukraine for future security guarantees. However, the German newspaper WELT reports that Europe can provide only 25,000. It is worth recalling that during the NATO/ISAF mission in Afghanistan, there were only about 35,000 troops.
In the Yugoslav crisis, Europe’s premature recognition of Croatia triggered large-scale destruction and deaths. Europe failed to manage the crisis and war, and in the end, the U.S. had to step in with the Dayton Agreement. A similar process is unfolding in Ukraine.
The U.S. supplied its weapons and European soldiers to Zelensky’s armies, but the war was lost. Despite facing tens of thousands of sanctions and embargoes, as well as global demonization and humiliation, Russia resisted and emerged victorious. Its most significant achievement in this process has been returning to its Cold War status with the U.S.
The U.S. declaration that it will no longer provide military support to Ukraine is a major loss for the EU. It also signals the potential closure of the American defense umbrella over Europe. Meanwhile, Trump’s demand that EU nations increase their defense spending to 5% of GDP is an extremely difficult goal to achieve. The economic situation of EU countries does not allow for this. During the Ukraine war, they were deprived of cheap energy and underwent deindustrialization. Their ability to sustain and expand volunteer military forces is limited. Their navies and air forces have shrunk, just like their armies.
Despite this, Europe, swayed by U.S. neocon rhetoric, openly challenged and insulted a power like Russia while providing weapons that were ultimately turned against them. When the U.S. suddenly withdrew from the battlefield, Europe was left as the spoiled rich kid abandoned in a fight. The tears of the Munich Security Conference chairman summarize the scandalous predicament the EU has found itself in.
Ultimately, as Trump has stated, the war caused by NATO expansion is ending because China is approaching like a massive tsunami and Russia’s progress on the battlefield cannot be halted. This conclusion is not just Trump’s doing but the result of a rational assessment based on concrete realities. As Trump also noted, Russia stopped both Napoleon and Hitler. A state with boundless depth and resources does not surrender easily.
From this point forward, the U.S. will focus on drawing Russia closer to weaken its ties with China. The EU will work to establish closer relations with China and reduce hostilities with Russia. Russia, in turn, will be willing to make concessions in non-critical areas to free itself from economic sanctions and embargoes as quickly as possible. However, it will not back down from the stance expressed by Hegseth at the NATO Defense Ministers’ meeting.
The diplomatic meeting between the U.S. and Russia is an extremely positive development for humanity.
On the other hand certain circles in Turkey and USA/EU, by inciting hostility between Russia and Turkey, have begun advocating for Turkey’s active participation in the security structure of the European Union—a bloc that has kept Turkey waiting at its doorstep for the past 80 years and humiliated it through issues such as the Customs Union and visa restrictions.
The example of the 1853 Crimean War alliance is frequently cited. However, these circles fail to remember that the Europeans who were our allies against Tsarist Russia in the Crimean War later attacked us alongside the Russians in World War I, 61 years later. Had Russia not withdrawn from the war after the 1917 revolution, and had Atatürk and Lenin did not form a friendship that led to Russian support for Turkey’s War of Independence against the imposition of the Treaty of Sèvres, there would be no Turkish Republic today.
These circles also ignore the fact that, despite significant hardships, Ankara managed to maintain neutrality during World War II. Furthermore, they overlook how, after 1945, Turkey fell under U.S. influence, and following its NATO membership in 1952, it effectively became an American protectorate. This shift distanced Turkey from Atatürk’s vision and opened the doors to religious and ethnic divisions, ultimately allowing the occupation of Atatürk’s republic by those who sought foreign dependency. The United States’ rapprochement with Russia to balance China should not be an excuse for Turkey to adopt an anti-Russian stance. Turkey should maintain equal distance from Russia, China, the EU, and the U.S., and it should avoid entering any military alliances except with the nations of the Turkic world.
*
Click the share button below to email/forward this article. Follow us on Instagram and X and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost Global Research articles with proper attribution.
This article was originally published on Mavi Vatan.
Ret Admiral Cem Gürdeniz, Writer, Geopolitical Expert, Theorist and creator of the Turkish Bluehomeland (Mavi Vatan) doctrine. He served as the Chief of Strategy Department and then the head of Plans and Policy Division in Turkish Naval Forces Headquarters. As his combat duties, he has served as the commander of Amphibious Ships Group and Mine Fleet between 2007 and 2009. He retired in 2012. He established Hamit Naci Blue Homeland Foundation in 2021. He has published numerous books on geopolitics, maritime strategy, maritime history and maritime culture. He is also a honorary member of ATASAM.
He is a regular contributor to Global Research.
Featured image is from Russian Foreign Ministry/Reuters
Global Research is a reader-funded media. We do not accept any funding from corporations or governments. Help us stay afloat. Click the image below to make a one-time or recurring donation.
No comments:
Post a Comment