[BostonCard]

As far as I understand it, Russia wants to claim territory in Donetsk and Luhansk that it does not control.  It would be one thing for Ukraine to cede land that it has lost militarily; it’s quite another to cede land that it still controls.  Furthermore, the land that Russia seeks is heavily fortified, and much more defensible than the land ahead of it.  The very legitimate worry on Ukraine’s side is that if it agrees to cede the land, then Russia regroups and attacks from there at some future date.

It would be great if we can get to a peace in Ukraine and Russia. But I don’t think Putin wants peace; he wants a capitulation.  Failing that, he wants to give Trump the illusion that he is willing to push for peace, to give him time and space to accomplish his maximalist goals militarily.  Based on what we’ve seen in the last week, I don’t think there is any difference in the assessment that Putin is “tapping us along” (to use Trump’s term).  I hope I am wrong, and that we get to a peace, even one that involves painful concessions by Ukraine.  But I think Putin is deliberately sticking to a demand that will be a bridge too far for Ukraine to take because he doesn’t want a peace deal; he just wants to look like he is not the obstacle to peace.

BC

---

1755643583[/url]']
I doubt they actually have "woken up". There are many social and political movements in Europe that are hostile to increased military spending, period. There are several generations of Europeans that have never imagined they might be called upon to defend their nation or that there was any need to do so. Most of those people still feel that way. Clearly Russia's activities in Ukraine have created significant angst in the body politic of Europe, but how deep that runs is as yet unknown. One metric is that there has not been any surge in volunteers for the German military :-). We have not yet seen how the electorate will view the required expenditures. Germany is dealing with a worse economic situation than they have seen in many, many years. AfD definitely doesn't want an increase in military expenditures at the expense of "Germany's interests". The UK is in such bad economic shape they are laying up perfectly good warships because they can't afford to crew them  My post on July 4th addressed some of these issues.

I think the chances that Europe (ex Spain) spends 5% of GDP on defense absent a direct attack on a NATO country is pretty slim.  Talk, as they say, is cheap, and Europeans know that this administration will only be around another 3 years and change.  I think we will see more spending, and everyone but Spain and Canada should exceed the old 2% target.  But another 3% spending on defense and defense-adjacent infrastructure will have to come from somewhere, so Europeans will have to either increase taxes (probably tough to do by that amount given taxes are already fairly high), increase productivity and GDP (the former is hard and no one really knows how to do it; the latter would require increasing the labor force, and given the resistance that Macron encountered increasing the retirement age, from 62 to 64, that does not bode well), redirecting money from the welfare state to defense (see the previous comment on increasing the retirement age), or further borrowing (but many countries are have debts exceeding 100% GDP).  Increased defense spending has been promised, but I expect a lot of electoral pushback once it is implemented, so I expect we won’t get to 5% outside of Poland and the Baltic countries.

BC

[BostonCard]

As far as I understand it, Russia wants to claim territory in Donetsk and Luhansk that it does not control.  It would be one thing for Ukraine to cede land that it has lost militarily; it’s quite another to cede land that it still controls.  Furthermore, the land that Russia seeks is heavily fortified, and much more defensible than the land ahead of it.  The very legitimate worry on Ukraine’s side is that if it agrees to cede the land, then Russia regroups and attacks from there at some future date.

It would be great if we can get to a peace in Ukraine and Russia. But I don’t think Putin wants peace; he wants a capitulation.  Failing that, he wants to give Trump the illusion that he is willing to push for peace, to give him time and space to accomplish his maximalist goals militarily.  Based on what we’ve seen in the last week, I don’t think there is any difference in the assessment that Putin is “tapping us along” (to use Trump’s term).  I hope I am wrong, and that we get to a peace, even one that involves painful concessions by Ukraine.  But I think Putin is deliberately sticking to a demand that will be a bridge too far for Ukraine to take because he doesn’t want a peace deal; he just wants to look like he is not the obstacle to peace.

BC

---

1755643583[/url]']
I doubt they actually have "woken up". There are many social and political movements in Europe that are hostile to increased military spending, period. There are several generations of Europeans that have never imagined they might be called upon to defend their nation or that there was any need to do so. Most of those people still feel that way. Clearly Russia's activities in Ukraine have created significant angst in the body politic of Europe, but how deep that runs is as yet unknown. One metric is that there has not been any surge in volunteers for the German military :-). We have not yet seen how the electorate will view the required expenditures. Germany is dealing with a worse economic situation than they have seen in many, many years. AfD definitely doesn't want an increase in military expenditures at the expense of "Germany's interests". The UK is in such bad economic shape they are laying up perfectly good warships because they can't afford to crew them  My post on July 4th addressed some of these issues.

I think the chances that Europe (ex Spain) spends 5% of GDP on defense absent a direct attack on a NATO country is pretty slim.  Talk, as they say, is cheap, and Europeans know that this administration will only be around another 3 years and change.  I think we will see more spending, and everyone but Spain and Canada should exceed the old 2% target.  But another 3% spending on defense and defense-adjacent infrastructure will have to come from somewhere, so Europeans will have to either increase taxes (probably tough to do by that amount given taxes are already fairly high), increase productivity and GDP (the former is hard and no one really knows how to do it; the latter would require increasing the labor force, and given the resistance that Macron encountered increasing the retirement age, from 62 to 64, that does not bode well), redirecting money from the welfare state to defense (see the previous comment on increasing the retirement age), or further borrowing (but many countries are have debts exceeding 100% GDP).  Increased defense spending has been promised, but I expect a lot of electoral pushback once it is implemented, so I expect we won’t get to 5% outside of Poland and the Baltic countries.

BC