General Seán Clancy, former Chief of Staff of the Irish Army (and successor to Liam Lynch!), and now Chair of the European UnionMilitary Committee, has been visiting the front line of the European War on Russia, to review the situation with Ukrainian General Oleksandr Syrskyí and Ukrainian Defence Minister Denys Shmyhal.  In the course of the review he said (according to Phoenix(22.8.25):  

“I think the war on Europe, in terms of the landmass of Europe, perpetrated by Russia on Ukraine, has shifted the model indefinitely…  If anything has come out of this in terms of positivity it is the unity within Europe in its response…”

Where does the “landmass of Europe” end, and the landmass of Asia begin?

The only physical break in the Ukraine is the River Dnieper.  Is that where General Clancy discussed the War with General Syrskyí?

The Dnieper also seems to mark a line of cultural and political division.  West of the Dnieper was for long periods part of the Polish state (first as a Polish Empire then a fascist Republic).

West Ukrainian nationalism asserted itself as European twice in recent times by making war on Russia (1917 and 1941).  In 1917 it acted in fascist alliance with Poland, and in 1941 in fascist alliance with Hitler’s Germany.  And, on both occasions it was actively anti-Semitic.  So, there are grounds for taking Western Ukraine to be culturally European:  Fascism and militarily active anti-Semitism are European phenomena.

It was ‘Asiatic’ Russia that saved the Jews:  by incorporating them into its political system, as active components of it, when Europe was intent on destroying them.  And it was ‘Asiatic’ Russia that broke the fascist order, and prevented Europe from settling down under it, when it was itself threatened by it.

That is how it seemed from the vantage point of neutral Ireland—which was unbiased by ‘vested interests’.  And that neutral view of the matter stands up very well as the Churchillian propaganda gloss fades away.

Post-fascist Europe finds it difficult to orientate itself as a unity because it was not through its own efforts that it became post-Fascist.  And General Clancy is right on seeing war with Russia remains a point of unity with it.

Of course it is not a “war on Europe”.  That’s just the etiquette of the thing:  the convention of always blaming the other side.

The War in Ukraine began with the American/European-inspired coup d’etat of 2014, which brought an extreme form of Ukrainian Nationalism to the fore and led to a State assault on the substantial Russian minority in the Ukraine.  This fact is not something gleaned from secret archives.  It is what we were told b y the mainstream news media in 2014.  It was taken out of the news when the US took over and decided to take the coup Government in hand and make use of it for proxy war against Russia.

Trump said the War in the Ukraine would not have happened if he had been President.  It happened under active American encouragement, including the promise of membership of NATO.

The United States itself had threatened nuclear war when Cuba tried to enter an active military alliance with the Soviet Union, but asserted that the Ukraine had a sovereign right to enter a military alliance against Russia.

Trump was asked if he wanted Ukraine to win.  He replied in effect that he wanted neither side to win.  To the European understanding that said he wanted Russia to win!  Europe is so lost in itself that it is unable to see the world.

Trump admits what Britain denied:  that there was a basis within the Ukraine for the War in the Ukraine.  He clearly wanted a settlement on the basis of the balance of forces established by the War—that was the old-fashioned way of doing these things, before Britain initiated “total war” in 1914—which can only end with the total destruction of the enemy.

To push the Ukrainian conflict to the destruction of Russia would involve nuclear war.  What sense would nuclear war with Russia make for the US?  Russia is not the main enemy.  Its economy is predicted by all the experts to be on the verge of collapse.  The main enemy is China.  It is China that the USA needs to destroy.  It has already destroyed Russia once—by selling illusions to Gorbachev, who believed them to be existential ideals or beliefs of the West—and didn’t know what to do with its victory.

To do what would be necessary to destroy it again would risk bringing China to absolute dominance! 

Contents

Europe Needs A War On Russia.  Editorial

Palestine!   Editorial

Geopolitics And Nations.  Pat Walsh

Readers’ Letters:  The ‘Indispensable Nation’.  Christopher and Mary Fogarty

Roger Casement And The Black Diaries, Some Common Sense!  

Review of Paul Hyde:  Anatomy Of A Lie!  John Martin

German Perspectives:  End Of The Road For Germany?  Militarisation And Welfare.  Herbert Remmel

The Morrison Report:  UAE Forces Trump To Say No! To Annexation.  David Morrison

The Brian Murphy osb Archive,Series 9, Part 9:  The Evolution Of British Policy And The Emergence Of A Sinn Fein Publicity Department In The Years After The Easter Rising

A Fianna Fail Election Poster!  Philip O’Connor discovers a 1920s gem  

Biteback:  Coalition Of The Willing?    Peace And Neutrality Alliance

Labour Comment,  Peace And Neutrality In The War [WW2]:  Eamon de Valera:  Dail Debates 1939-40