NATO in Freefall: Europe's Ukraine Gamble

December 16, 2025

The European leaders – Merz, Starmer, and Macron – are doing the US a great favor: they are sinking NATO into non-existence while at the same time potentially splitting the EU. Having no money, they just completed a meeting with Zelensky, still backing him, with Zelensky confirming no concession on land. So the EU leaders are moving forward with using Russian assets to finance the war , with the US and some European countries opposing and questioning the legality of it. This will certainly put a new spin on the war, and it will either be decided by the end of the year or in the next 12 months – but then a capitulation of Ukraine, or sorry, NATO , will lead to better negotiation. You have no money and no willing people to get killed, and you cannot get it from a beggar. Or perhaps, the ultimate peace proposal.

It is war, and war in corruption becomes very evident. It starts with the same person who wants to extend the war, orders some show investigation, and moves people around but not out. The same president has opposed elections. But I take it the three European stooges (translate) and Biden underestimated everything, and now they can't jump over their egos and force Zelensky onto his own sword? So if the peace talks fail, step one: get elections in Ukraine – for president and by region on whether they want to be Russian or Ukrainian – and then take it from there. Wouldn't that be democracy? And don't cry me a river about election interference. I wonder if the people in their respective countries really care about Ukraine, and if all that is reported is actually true. The first two options the West opposes, so that leads to the third option: to change nothing and maintain the status quo. Ukraine would continue launching precision strikes on Russian oil infrastructure in the hope of grinding down the Kremlin's economy and waiting for Putin to die. This is an illusion. If such strikes could not break a smaller Ukraine, they will not break a country many times larger in economic, territorial and demographic terms. Damage will be inflicted, but nowhere near enough to force Russia to stop. All the while, 80% of Europeans and 60% of Americans agree on the slaughter , and like Congress, want to cash in on the hardware – a symptom of PDS, Putin Derangement Syndrome, for the "democratists'" definition of autocracy. Note: the casualties are reported by CSIS, potentially reversed? So what is really the objective, other than expanding NATO and hoping Russia finally fails so the West can rob it of its resources, or move NATO to accept region by region? All pipe dreams. In 2026, Germany, France, and England have a great chance to be governed by Trump-like leaders. What will happen to TDS then, as in reality Europe is losing its culture and sense? US–Russia relations – build a connection to Alaska and take the resources? The gradual result could be the creation of complex strategic interdependence between the US and Russia, something that was non-existent prior to the "special operation" against Ukraine, for reducing the risk of another crisis. The US would also establish a strategic economic presence along China's western and northern peripheries that could be flaunted for prestige. And more importantly, help yourself. Instead, "it prioritizes threats from the Western Hemisphere, European civilizational decline and overregulation and trade deficits – but says nothing about the Russian threat to US interests, and views China almost entirely through the lens of economic security," argued Thomas Wright, a former national security official under the Biden administration. In other words, diplomacy for war – the real meaning of peace through strength?