The European army concept is ambiguous - what do European leaders actually want to achieve?
On November 5–6, a group of high-profile foreign policy analysts from the United States visited Minsk and met with Belarusian President Alyaksandr Lukashenka. The guests included retired General Benjamin Hodges, who in 2014–2017 commanded US Army forces in Europe; Michael Carpenter, a former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense; Bruce McClintock, an expert from the Rand Corporation; Glen Howard, president of the Washington-based analytical-research institution The Jamestown Foundation (the group’s organizer); and Vladimir Socor, Jamestown’s leading expert on Eurasia. The US delegation also met with Foreign Minister Vladimir Makei, held discussions at the Ministry of Defense as well as paid visits to a military cadet school, the High-Tech Park, and the Belarusian Museum of the Great Patriotic War. They also laid a wreath at the monument “Minsk—a Hero-City,” thus paying tribute to those who liberated Belarus from the Nazis (Belta, November 5).
An audiotape released by Kiev appears to back up their version of events. One former U.S. military commander says there’s no doubt.
A Russian ship has just rammed a Ukrainian vessel, opened fire on it and captured its sailors. Ukraine has called it an act of war, and legally it may be right. But more than this the act reveals the nature of the true Russia.
Since illegally annexing Crimea in 2014, Russia has drastically increased its military presence in the Black Sea region. The Kremlin’s dominance may be temporary given NATO’s greater capacities, but so far, NATO’s response has been limited.