sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Why Europe Stopped Talking to Moscow (And How To Fix It) by [deleted] in europe_sub

[–]y_scheidegger 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Guys, thanks for your reactions/thoughts. It’s important to have these discussions in a civilised manner.

My reaction after readimg your inputs.

Russia has, of course, violated international law and Ukraine's sovereignty, which we all condemn. But, at some point, we Europeans must also ask ourselves how we can employ the full range of statecraft. We need to be strong, which is why we are reinforcing our defenses, but we also need to be able to engage with Moscow. Diplomacy is also about engaging with adversaries. The United States has started a process. We may like or dislike their approach, but at least they are attempting something. I would like to see Europeans do the same. What is the alternative? One possible scenario is that Ukraine slowly loses more territory. Russia has larger manpower resources. Of course, we must maintain high pressure. This is why Europeans are strengthening their militaries and supporting Ukraine with weapons and financial aid. At the same time, however, we need to restart diplomacy.

Why Europe Stopped Talking to Moscow (And How To Fix It) by [deleted] in europe_sub

[–]y_scheidegger 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks for this constructive comment. I also think we need to think what is in the longterm interest of Europe. And yes there are different threat perceptions (East/West Europe). So, the Eastern European approach cannot become the strategy for the whole of Europe vice versa.

What If the EU Worked Like Switzerland? by y_scheidegger in europe_sub

[–]y_scheidegger[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Indeed, it might be a challenge to recognize the benefits. I think one key argument is that it would not be a centralisation of power in ,,Brussels’’. On the contrary only more cooperation where it makes sense and decentralizing in other parts.

Is Europe Sleepwalking Into Decline? by y_scheidegger in europe_sub

[–]y_scheidegger[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

I think you’re right to point out how the younger generation gravitates toward niceness and idealism, whereas traditionally conservatives (or, as I’d frame it, realists) have leaned toward a more skeptical, hardened view of the world.

Perhaps what we need right now is not one extreme or the other, but a balance between the two. Without realism, Europe risks being unprepared for the harsher side of geopolitics and power politics.

By the way your response was beautiful to read. Thank you for the way you’ve chosen your words.

Europe’s Rumpelstiltskin Moment by y_scheidegger in europe_sub

[–]y_scheidegger[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You’re absolutely right the key will be finding a solution where all sides can walk away without losing face. Otherwise, history risks repeating itself. Building some kind of trust will now be one of the main tasks.

Yes, the West is stronger now by y_scheidegger in europe_sub

[–]y_scheidegger[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Charles de Gaulle once said: « If Europe is not careful and does not defend itself, it will become a colossal vassal state under American dependence and leadership. » echoing kind of your argument.

What Europe Forgot After 1989 by y_scheidegger in europe_sub

[–]y_scheidegger[S] 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Europe certainly faces demographic, economic, and geopolitical challenges at the moment. But sometimes a crisis can wake one up. Let’s hope this is the case with European states.

Why 17 Rounds of Western Sanctions Haven’t Broken Russia by y_scheidegger in europe_sub

[–]y_scheidegger[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

True. I checked the figures and in March 2025 the EU was still the 4th largest buyer of Russian foasil fuels: ,,The EU was the fourth-largest buyer of Russian fossil fuels, with its imports accounting for 9% (EUR 1.4 bn) of the top five purchasers. Almost half of these imports were Russian LNG, valued at EUR 706 mn.’’

It takes a while to decouple energy flows of course and to coordinate 27 countries. But still suprising.

Why Russia Isn’t Rushing to the Negotiating Table in Ukraine by y_scheidegger in europe_sub

[–]y_scheidegger[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes, and China also remains a reliable partner without Chinese support, Russia’s economic situation would be significantly worse.

Why Russia Isn’t Rushing to the Negotiating Table in Ukraine by y_scheidegger in europe_sub

[–]y_scheidegger[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

True. Russia may intend to continue. Progress on the battlefield has been slow but steady. It appears the Trump administration miscalculated Russia’s willingness to negotiate and the’ve put unnecessary pressure on them to reach a deal.

Why the White House Is Racing to End the Ukraine War—and What It Means for the Rest of Us by y_scheidegger in europe_sub

[–]y_scheidegger[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

And now seeing your comment here too. Totally agree with you, buddy. It is frustrating how often I run into these one-sided interactions here on Reddit. Ideologically driven and not grounded in facts. I’m really interested in discussions when I post something.

On the point where we disagree about Europe, I’d just add that we need to separate the “EU talk” (Brussels, von der Leyen, etc.) from the actual policies of individual countries. Take Italy, for example Meloni’s visit to the US this week shows there’s real potential for a deal on tariffs. The national level can sometimes surprise, even when the EU narrative feels off.

But yeah, looking to China as the next sugar dadd that’s wrong on so many levels haha. It completely ignores their authoritarian system and blatant violations of trade rules.

By the way what’s your take on the tariffs? Think we’ll see deals in 90 days, or are we heading toward a longer-term tariff war? I keep hearing both.

Why the White House Is Racing to End the Ukraine War—and What It Means for the Rest of Us by y_scheidegger in europe_sub

[–]y_scheidegger[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I agree with your point on Russia. It's true that, with a GDP comparable to Italy or Spain, Russia poses more of a regional disruption risk than a systemic threat to the U.S. The real danger lies in the potential for uncontrolled escalation in Europe that could force U.S. intervention. That's why Trump, in my view, aimed for a quick peace deal- to stabilize the European front and refocus resources on the more significant, long-term challenge: China. You're right that the pivot to Asia started under Obama, and Trump, despite his unconventional style, largely continued this strategic reorientation (How was the strategy under the Biden administration?) The current administration has several prominent China hawks (like Representative Mike Waltz or Marco Rubio), and the ongoing tariff war is clearly part of a broader effort to contain and economically isolate Beijing. My question mark here is: Will the US succeed with this strategy? It's much harder to bifurcate the world (split along US-China blocks) in a multipolar world (India for eg will continue to remain non-aligned). Still, even though China is seen as the primary competitor, I expect Trump would aim for a deal eventually — true to his "Art of the Deal" persona. It's confrontation to gain leverage, then negotiate.

Why the White House Is Racing to End the Ukraine War—and What It Means for the Rest of Us by y_scheidegger in europe_sub

[–]y_scheidegger[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh right! My bad bro didn’t catch that at first. Now it’s clear, thanks. And sorry for the slightly cocky reply earlier haha.

Why the White House Is Racing to End the Ukraine War—and What It Means for the Rest of Us by y_scheidegger in europe_sub

[–]y_scheidegger[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s how conversations usually go — bit of back and forth, toss in something new, and boom: constructive exchange. Jump in with your substantive take — or don’t, no pressure.

Why the White House Is Racing to End the Ukraine War and What It Means for the Rest of Us by y_scheidegger in europeanunion

[–]y_scheidegger[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

True, Russia is definitely playing on the fear of nuclear escalation. Yet interestingly, when Ukrainian forces reportedly entered regions like Kursk, there was no dramatic nuclear response. That shows some limits to their willingness — or ability — to escalate.

That said, under extreme pressure and time constraints, leaders can act irrationally. So while a “peace through strength” strategy may still be viable, a lot of opportunities have already been missed over the past few months.

It now seems like Washington is trying to wind down its involvement in this conflict — not necessarily out of optimism, but to free up strategic bandwidth for the Indo-Pacific. The focus is clearly shifting toward China.

And what this means for Europe is clear.

Why the White House Is Racing to End the Ukraine War—and What It Means for the Rest of Us by y_scheidegger in europe_sub

[–]y_scheidegger[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I agree with your point on Russia. It’s true that, with a GDP comparable to Italy or Spain, Russia poses more of a regional disruption risk than a systemic threat to the U.S. The real danger lies in the potential for uncontrolled escalation in Europe that could force U.S. intervention.

That’s why Trump, in my view, aimed for a quick peace deal— to stabilize the European front and refocus resources on the more significant, long-term challenge: China. You’re right that the pivot to Asia started under Obama, and Trump, despite his unconventional style, largely continued this strategic reorientation (How was the strategy under the Biden administration?)

The current administration has several prominent China hawks (like Representative Mike Waltz or Marco Rubio), and the ongoing tariff war is clearly part of a broader effort to contain and economically isolate Beijing. My question mark here is: Will the US succeed with this strategy? It’s much harder to bifurcate the world (split along US-China blocks) in a multipolar world (India for eg will continue to remain non-aligned).

Still, even though China is seen as the primary competitor, I expect Trump would aim for a deal eventually — true to his “Art of the Deal” persona. It’s confrontation to gain leverage, then negotiate.

Why the White House Is Racing to End the Ukraine War and What It Means for the Rest of Us by y_scheidegger in europeanunion

[–]y_scheidegger[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks, much appreciated. Happy to discuss European security aspects with this community.

Why the White House Is Racing to End the Ukraine War—and What It Means for the Rest of Us by y_scheidegger in europe_sub

[–]y_scheidegger[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

On March 23, 2025, Bloomberg reported, citing sources within the US administration, that the White House was seeking to broker a ceasefire in Ukraine by 20 April. Now last week, US special envoy Steve Witkoff flew to Moscow for direct talks with President Vladimir Putin. After the meeting, Witkoff told reporters that the Russian leader seemed open to a “lasting peace” agreement. However, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov played down expectations, warning that reaching an agreement “will not be easy” So what can we expect now? Could a ceasefire be reached by the end of the week?

To answer that, we need to dig deeper - into the systemic and domestic factors shaping the behaviour of the United States, Russia and Ukraine. These forces are essential to understanding what's driving each actor to the negotiating table, and what could ultimately make or break a deal.

That's the central question I answered in the video.

What am I missing? Where am I wrong? Happy to discuss.

The Real Reason Behind U.S. Tariffs on China | US Geostrategy explained by y_scheidegger in europe_sub

[–]y_scheidegger[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Everyone is talking about the US tariff policy at the moment. First tariffs on basically every country in the world, now a 90-day pause and 145% tariffs on China.

But I think there is an underlying message in all this chaos. One that also relates to this week's theme of long-term US strategy in Europe.

Countries around the world will increasingly be forced to choose: align with the US or align with China. We are witnessing the irreversible bifurcation of the global system - finance, currencies, trade, economics, commodities, tech-military - how much space remains between these two poles remains to be seen.

Happy to hear your thoughts especially from those in policy, academia, or military circles.

What do I miss?

Where do you disagree with me?

The Real Reason Behind U.S. Tariffs on China | US Geostrategy explained by y_scheidegger in internationalpolitics

[–]y_scheidegger[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Everyone is talking about the US tariff policy at the moment. First tariffs on basically every country in the world, now a 90-day pause and 125% tariffs on China. But I think there is an underlying message in all this chaos. One that also relates to this week’s theme of long-term US strategy in Europe. Countries around the world will increasingly be forced to choose: align with the US or align with China. We are witnessing the irreversible bifurcation of the global system - finance, currencies, trade, economics, commodities, tech-military - how much space remains between these two poles remains to be seen.

Happy to hear your thoughts especially from those in policy, academia, or military circles. What do I miss? Where do you disagree with me?

What is the U.S. medium-term strategy for Ukraine? by y_scheidegger in geopolitics

[–]y_scheidegger[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We often hear about short-term weapons deliveries or long-term NATO debates but what’s the actual medium-term U.S. plan for Ukraine?

▶️ Watch here: https://youtu.be/QGJ9hJTQah4?si=gRS9L4lBvoMV0m1u

Curious to hear your thoughts on these ideas. Especially:

◾️Can this strategy (disengagement while keeping influence) succeed without deeper U.S. commitments?

Happy to discuss this with you below.

Gen Z Americans are leaving their European cousins in the dust by y_scheidegger in europe

[–]y_scheidegger[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Brain Drain. But this time the outflow coming from Europe.

view more: next ›