Bubblereport #16 – From the New Green Deal to the New War Deal: Lady Ursula is planning an EU rearmament strategy but without a political reform that could really lead to a common army (and therefore debt through serious treaty reforms). The EU is chasing events, not dominating them. Proof of this are the barbs between Scholz and Macron over Ukraine, which are cracking European effectiveness. This is not to say that Scholz leaked intelligence information that put France and Britain at risk

One thing can be said with reasonable common sense: the New Green Deal, with its laws oppressing Eu citizens and killing Eu economy, is giving way to a far more robust New War Deal, where to silence the weapons, new ones are being built to defend Fortress Europe and make it autonomous from the United States. 

This is not a wrong principle, but it becomes very dangerous when it is done in the absence of even the slightest political project, such as the one that was created in America after the

War of Secession: a currency, an army, a debt. You don't see Alexander Hamilton (the first US Secretary of the Treasury) around. And Draghi does not have the political and electoral consensus he needs to become a European counterpart. But the time for inaction is coming to a dramatic end, and it can hardly be enough to recite the sacred writings of Spinelli, Monnet, Schumann and Adenauer in the EU bunker while sending arms and money to Zelensky without having a peace plan in the drawer. Europe needs a common way and a common agenda. It must be written before June, before facts prevail over reason, before everyone is dragged onto the ground of conflict. 

At the moment there is no trace of this common path. Suffice it to say that the past week should have been the week of mobilization of Europeans and instead it was the week of misunderstandings. The Paris conference and the pledges to increase military assistance to Kyiv should have been an opportunity to send a pass of resolve and deterrence to Putin. But personal rivalries and Franco-German taboos are having the opposite effect. First there were the words of Macron, who did not rule out putting soldiers on the ground to maintain strategic ambiguity, provoking an immediate denial from Olaf Scholz. Then there was a major strategic faux pas by the German Chancellor, who, in order to justify his opposition to the delivery of his Taurus long-range missiles, revealed intelligence information that put France and Britain at risk. Meanwhile, in Brussels, France and Germany's differences have made the €5 billion European Peace Facility to finance weapons to Kyiv less rich, less rapid and less effective. Macron and Scholz say they share the same goal: not letting Putin win the war. But for months, the two have been trading accusations. Germany has said that France spends too little on Kyiv. French Defense Minister Sebastien Lecornu has retorted that Berlin has provided tanks that do not work. At the Paris conference, Macron insisted on Taurus for the coalition of medium- and long-range missiles and did not spare indirect criticism of Scholz, recalling that at the beginning of the war, Germany had always said "nein to anything" except sleeping bags and helmets. To defend himself in the face of public opinion, Scholz implied that France and the United Kingdom have military personnel involved in the use of Scalp and Storm Shadow missiles in Ukraine. Military advisors assisting a country at war is nothing new. But to say so publicly is tantamount to denouncing complicity. It is even more serious if Putin interprets this concept broadly to threaten nuclear strikes. Taurus will be absolutely necessary before the summer, when the Scalp and the Strom Shadow are exhausted. Otherwise, Russia can redeploy the Black Sea Fleet to Sevastopol and reimpose a blockade on grain exports. Kearns, a British Conservative MP, added: "Scholz should deliver the Taurus and stop compromising European security. For now, this is the reality of 'common' European defense.