17 ms·
If you look at the Baltic Sea before and after the invasion of Ukraine, that was largely a neutral space (before) that has since turned into a NATO one -- exclu
by nicolapede 3y ago
If you look at the Baltic Sea before and after the invasion of Ukraine, that was largely a neutral space (before) that has since turned into a NATO one -- excluding only the Russian exclave of Kaliningrad.
I would argue this makes any further move by Russia in that space quite problematic.
- pphysch 3y agoSweden and Finland have been in the EU for almost 30 years. Sweden joining NATO does not really change the geopolitics of the Baltic.
- tw04 3y agoOf course it does. Sweden and Finland being members of the EU had absolutely 0 bearing on the US getting involved in a war with Russia. Do you honestly think Russia would've tried to invade Ukraine if they were NATO members?
- jajko 3y agoEU is economical/societal effort (or war prevention), NATO is military (and doesn't prevent members from fighting, ie Greece vs Turkey). Ever heard of actual EU army? Doesn't exist out there in the world, maybe on paper.
- dragonwriter 3y ago> Ever heard of actual EU army? Well, there's Eurocorps for the last few decades, but that's not an army, just a corps-level HQ unit under which component-state forces can be slotted. OTOH, that's not a particularly poor model for a fairly loose multi-state federation. On the other other hand, its not actually an EU force, its a force of a particular group of EU states that is made available to both the EU and NATO, and has conducted operations on behalf of each.
- gpderetta 3y agoThe treaty of Lisbon has a mutual defence clause. Membership of NATO also guarantees help from US and other non-EU NATO members of course.
- MaxPengwing 3y agoGiven that we (Sweden) have been the preferred partner with Norway for NATO winter training exercises since the 1980s and our entire military strategy was based on "Nato will protect us if Putin invades" you are not wrong. What changed was USA having people like Trump and the Republican party talk about not protecting NATO countries anymore. It made us realize that we can't continue to count on US help as the premise is based on the US having absolute control of the nuclear weapons, but loading them on NATO ally dual capable airplanes to launch the nukes. If Europe is not convinced that the US will not share the nukes as agreed, then Europe has to actually rearm and might even casue a nuclear proliferation with France and UK restarting their nuclear programs. so yeah it changes and not changes the geopolitics.
- guappa 3y agoFrance and Germany rearming… what a great idea!
- catlikesshrimp 3y agoConsidering the invasion of Ukraine for the second time in 10 years, and the official threats of using nuclear weapons, rearming doesn't sound as bad as before.
- The_Colonel 3y agoThere were actually three distinct invasions - Crimea in early 2014, Donbas in summer/autumn 2014 (after the rebels started losing), and finally 2022.
- guappa 3y ago> and the official threats of using nuclear weapons "Why are we shocked? Of course if a country has a weapon it also conceives a situation where it would use it. If a country would never under no circumstance use a weapon it would not have the weapon at all. Every country who has a weapon also conceives a scenario when to use it. Even if they don't issue reminders" -- My own translation from an interview to Alessandro Barbero
- dragonwriter 3y agoThe EU is not a military alliance, NATO is. There is a substantial difference between countries being in the EU only and being in NATO (either only or along with the EU.)
- u320 3y agoEU is technically a military alliance (article 42). Just not as strong as NATO.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]