(Context of the series: Musings about how Free Europe could defend itself against a U.S. after it turned full Fascist, which regrettably is a realistic scenario.)
Those who defend only lose. Free Europe would rather not have allies who strike at Americans if it's under attack by an America turned Fascist. Thus its needs its own offensive and thus deterrence potential.
Economic warfare
The asymmetry in favour of the Americans is real, but I suppose it's widely underestimated how much Europeans can hurt Americans with economic sanctions. The Americans deindustrialised and are dependent on imports in many categories of products. There would be not just a giant economic shock to Europe in case of transatlantic hostilities, but also in America.
European deterrence & defence policy should should strive to
- reduce American economic warfare potential against Europe
- increase European economic warfare potential against America
Realistically, neither faction has the political system or political class to pull much of this off.
Threat to American maritime trade (sea lanes)
The U.S. Navy is a land attack navy, not a trade protection navy. It has ridiculously marginal preparations to protect even only American coastal shipping other than satellite and oceanic hydrophones infrastructure. The American bureaucracy is currently FUBARing a frigate project by spiralling the demands towards its normal preferences. The minehunting capability of the USN is negligible in context of how many ports and straits it has to secure.
The threat to American sea lanes could thus be realised with relatively modest resources compared to the resources the Americans pumped into their (land attack) navy. Three categories come to my mind:
- within practical range of Europe-based air power
- close to CONUS
- distant oceans
#1 can be covered by European air power - it could be turned into a no-go zone for American cargo ships. The challenge would be to inspect the cargo ships to determine whether they have contraband.
#2 Europeans would be the underdogs here, a classic case for the use of submarines. Nuclear-powered attack submarines have deceived people into thinking that diesel-electric submarines are for short distances in coastal waters only, but that's nonsense. Some WW2 submarines exceeded 30,000 nm range at tonnages that would not be very unusual nowadays for a conventional submarine (and small to extremely small for a nuclear one). So Europeans could build conventional (air independent) submarines capable of reaching and operating in American coastal waters, including deploying very capable naval mines (essentially battery-powered torpedoes that slowly cruise to position and then lie in ambush outside of ports).
#3 is a classic case for armed merchantmen used for commerce raiding. The USN might hunt them using satellites, but there are ways to shake off such tracking, particularly if said satellites are being engaged (damaged or destroyed) while they're over Europe. The armed merchantmen could board ships by helicopter, inspect them for contraband and then take them as prize, force them to turn around or sink them. These armed merchantmen might also sneak up to American warships to launch a surprise anti-ship missile or heavyweight torpedo salvo. They would need external intelligence sources to do this, of course.
Both #2 and #3 would benefit somewhat from preparations such as fortified or clandestine overseas bases with diesel, kerosene and possibly even munitions stockpiles as well as a runway.
Threaten CONUS itself
The out of the box approaches for this would be very long range cruise missiles (launched from long-range airliners or disguised ships) and -fashionably- drone swarms. The out-of-the-box approach for Americans who are used to insane military budgets is intercontinental VLO (stealth) bombers supported by long range airliner-based tanker aircraft. These assets would cause some explosions at targets.
But we know that American politicians pursue overwhelmingly the interest of a rich minority (0.1...10% of the population), and a Fascist government would likely do the same plus be paranoid about securing its own power.
Would a few thousand explosions here and there be a deterrent or a welcome propaganda gift to mobilise the population for the war (reduction of consumption to increase military spending)? I suppose the explosions would need to be able to threaten the regime (or provoke infights within it). The super-rich would likely lose relevance once Fascism has taken hold - they're useful idiots to fund Fascism winning the last real elections, and afterwards not so critical any more. It might be more effective to drop USB sticks with propaganda files than to hit even the most leverage targets among industry, military, infrastructure or government buildings. We don't really need to drop USB sticks for that; files can be smuggled past even a great national firewall.
Part V will or would try to cover the "Spaceship" orbital bombardment scenario. The technical side of this is way outside of my comfort zone.
What would the European response be to the traditional Anglosphere weapon against continental Europe - the naval blockade?
ReplyDeleteThere's enough trade routes by land and air. Trade would be limited to necessities and air freight, but not collapse entirely.
DeleteI don't think it makes much sense to build a third giant navy (next to USN and PLAN) just for this scenario.
The whole premise is a united Europe.But the East,will not just give up on America,just because Germany will someday declare USA to be fascist.So,before attacking USA it might be wise to prevent E Europeans from taking Amsterdam.And be greeted as saviours by half the population.
ReplyDeleteAmerica cannot protect Eastern European countries while hostile to Western Europe. Eastern Europeans are not terminally dumb and any democratic Eastern European government would would barter for benefits within the EU.
DeleteBesides, Western European military power would suffice to quickly neutralise a few European countries that side with an openly hostile enemy of Free Europe just as Ireland could not possibly have sided with Nazi Germany in WW2.
Oh, its like Cauldron by Larry Bond.
Delete"before attacking USA"
DeleteI think you misunderstood the premise of the post.
I am not talking about America protecting E Europe,although being under their nuclear umbrella might be of value.I am talking about W Europe being able to protect itself from Eastern armies.If there is an emphasis now in the East,is on building armies.
DeleteYes,they are for the Russians in real life,but the EU gets a bad mark in this real life as we speak.USA &UK got good marks for their perceived decisive action in the current war.W.Europe is perceived as an indecisive procrastinator.Simply declaring USA as fascist will be met with a shrug in the East.
Btw,speaking of legitimacy.EU side can very easily be confronted with a few actions perceived as commited by the new Europeans.A couple of Utoyas and the whole premise of European anti-fascism gets the boot at the next election.
And I said Utoya,precisely because large events,at remote locations cannot be realistically policed properly.
You are not mentioning the first requirement for contemporary deterrence and security. Especially, the defense of a huge industrial "state" (an effective European defense needs an alliance so solid it functions like a state, at least as long as the war shall last). So, let's call Europe a quasi-state.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, the first requirement is (and I really hate to say this): a large enough strategic nuclear arsenal. It is not being paranoid that my country will threaten nuclear first use if "we" (well, our elites) don't get our way. I believe that there are serious factions in the U.S. that will actually mean those as real promises, not bluffs. Europeans should prepare for the worst case.
Somebody has to bring these fools to their senses (if that's even possible). The only way to do that is to have a credible nuclear arsenal - considerably larger and more powerful than the French SSBN deterrent; and no, you cannot count on the British arsenal. The UK arsenal might even be part of the American threat against Europe.
The record of the United States in using the nuclear threat is frankly insane. When/if the U.S. military feels it can't win conventionally, we rattle the nuclear saber. Look it up. We threatened to nuke China during the Korean War. We threatened to nuke North Vietnam. The Pentagon discussed using nukes against Iran in 1979, and again in 1991 against Iraq.
And America hates it when somebody can punch back - a legacy of no serious war on our soil since 1865. Imagine a guy who really, really likes to start fights because he knows that when he loses, he's got an instant escape/reset button. That's the American nukes today, MUCH more so than even the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans.
The only way to not be afraid of our nukes is to have your own large arsenal to cancel out ours. That is the world we live in.
I suppose the size of the French nuclear arsenal isn't really too small, and I wrote a separate blog post series a while ago about how to make it more credible that French nukes would be used for retaliation if a non-French city was busted.
DeleteThe issue may rather be that Americans might delude themselves into trusting BMD, so alternative means of delivery than SLBM may be needed. Maybe a submarine-delivered ASN4G.
USA can start SDI 2.0 with Space-X. Like Brilliant Pebbles and another.
DeleteAre you overlooking the whole cyber warfare dimension?
ReplyDeleteIf we fight a fascist America, we'll have a war on European soil with overt and covert allies of said fascists.
There's also a dimension of internal security. We have a lot of people with dangerous ideologies in our countries, German "Gefährder". Any enemy will try to make use of their potential to create friction and endanger the government. If a hostile intelligence service is able to ship them weapons, we're toast, because our internal and external security forces are too small to reestablish control in case of a war.
A fascist America won't be without allies, especially Russia bolstered by American aid would be a danger and potential allies are too far away to matter.
No, I referred in part I to
Deletehttps://defense-and-freedom.blogspot.com/2022/08/it-security-for-real.html
My prediction is that European resistance against whatever US government would quickly collapse and much of our technical elite would switch to higher paid jobs in the US.
ReplyDelete"My prediction is that European resistance against whatever US government would quickly collapse and much of our technical elite would switch to higher paid jobs in the US."
ReplyDeleteHard to say, really. Are you assuming that American subversion and propaganda have succeeded in Europe whereas it failed in Asia?
Fun fact: East Asians are studying in the U.S., but for the most part going back to their own countries after graduation, or a few years of work. Of course they are - that's basic patriotism. They don't hate America, they just love their own lands. Even if it means the Asians live considerably less well at home, they are going home. That's already the trend for the last 15 to 16 years, going on 20 soon.
Now, some Europeans will relocate to the U.S. I am betting that most will not. They will choose to keep building Europe.
And who says that U.S. jobs pay more? Especially in real PPP terms, adjusted for what the numbers on the money actually can buy? Let me tell you, the inflation in the U.S. is high, even ridiculous in some cases.
LOL. Did you know that the Federal statistics of inflation specifically EXCLUDE the following: Housing/Rent, Food, Transport/Vehicles/Fuel, Education, Medical Care and Energy (like for heating/cooling etc)? A lot of household appliances are also not counted. So what is left?
Oh yeah, luxury goods and luxury travel are only getting 9% more expensive annually. Hooray!! U.S. inflation is only at 9%!!!
Goddamn, I feel like such a winner now, right?
Honestly, funnily enough, NO. Just . . . NO.
If you talk with Asians, you'll see more patriotism. In Europe hardly anyone is willing to fight for their country.
DeleteNonsense, Turks dodge the draft as much as possible, Japan disregards its armed forces, Taiwan neglects its armed forces.
DeleteThe South Koreans and Vietnamese are the only ones in Asia who have a high level of awawareness that they need to deter with perosnal effort, but no more than Estonians or Finns.
And the bollocks polls about willingness to personally defend the own country aren't worth the paper. Such attitudes can change within days once an actual threat is clear.
I feel like the main threat of a fascist america to europe is political, not military. Sure, if some Trump figure just all out demanded tribute with threat of military force, a unified defense might form. But if someone smarter extends their hand to the european right to "save western civilization together" you will see sizable portions of the populations - the majority probably in eastern europe - wonder if that's not an offer worth taking. Including chunks of the usually right wing military. And america has its experience with organizing coups.
ReplyDeleteIn the places, where the coup doesn't work, there'll be another Cuba situation.
DeleteThe Nordstream destruction, which almost everyone in my country believes we did, IS already America demanding tribute (in this case "align with us, or we will do much worse").
DeleteSure, no U.S. leader went on TV or the internet and told Europe to "bend the knee", but only a VERY, VERY dumb European does not get the message loud and clear. Used to be that financial and diplomatic pressure was the limit, while destruction and violence were understood to be disallowed.
Now, bombing and violence are allowed, because no one in Europe even spoke up after Nordstream.
Sheesh, the U.S. is now behaving towards Europe like Israel behaved in the Middle East for decades - you know, periodic assassinations, bombings, intimidation - not due to real issues, just to show who's boss. Israel = the U.S.; Europe = Palestinian people.
You guys need an outsider like me to be outraged on your behalf? Don't you find it strange and bizarre that we dare not push China nor even Russia via our thuggery, but "oh, those Europeans are part of our empire, they will meekly submit?"
Please, sit down and seriously think about it.
When the pipeline was destroyed, germany had already firmly aligned with the west on the russian matter. The theory that america did it to enforce that doesn't add up. And if they did, or if it had been necessary, they would have done us a favour for all I care.
Delete"The Nordstream destruction, which almost everyone in my country believes we did, IS already America demanding tribute (in this case "align with us, or we will do much worse")."
DeleteLet's start with physics:
1) Northstream is added capacity, not essential capacity.
To have anet effect you have to destroy additional pipeline capacity in Ukraine.
Add Politics:
2) NS was useful because it reeduced US influence. With the attack on Ukraine RUSSIA removed this advantage.
But your conspiracy theory is of course more fun.
Destruction of NS had no effect of German industry or energy cost? Germans (and only Germans) have the right to refuse NS gas, or right to choose U.S. LNG. But German valuable property should be respected - only Germans have the decision to destroy own property, no one else.
DeleteDisagree?
"In the places, where the coup doesn't work, there'll be another Cuba situation."
ReplyDeleteRespectfully disagree. America can "sanction" Cuba, even semi-isolate Iran (not working anymore, as Iran has turned to the East), but to try that with Europe?
LOL. Europe will just turn East (EurAsia) and South (Africa) as well. And America will be more isolated.
Although, the "powers that be" aren't that smart. I think they will try coups and "orange (fake) revolutions". It's up to Europeans not to fall for it.
@SO I think you attract Russian and Chinese propagandists with these posts. A conflict between the US and some European countries is possible, but we're holding a much smaller stick.
ReplyDeleteAnd?
DeleteIs that European stick smaller than the Iranian, Syrian or Venezuelan stick? Is it smaller than the Cuban stick?
DeleteNo? It's bigger than those?
Then buddy, it's big enough. You just have to have the courage to . . . PICK IT UP!
I think some writers here want to stoke the flames, because they want Europe to fail in such a conflict.
DeleteDefence policy should secure the nation, and nowadays this means Germany should prepare for defence against America as well. We won't have enough time to do so if we wait till they turned full Fascist.
DeleteI don't think the US is becoming fascist, but I agree that we need both capabilities to oppose them and capabilities to be a valuable alliance partner, which to a degree overlap. We also need to bridge political divides within, because there are too many voices in thrall to Russia and China such as the AfD and BSW. Maybe new parties and lowered entry level requirements can help. And very importantly, we need to bridge the divides in Europe, so we can jointly defend our interests against an overreaching US. I don't see that being done and as long as we won't stand together, we're better off individually rather bending than breaking.
DeleteExcellent that this whole topic of Europe's independence is being discussed now. It's a very serious matter, and it will take at least a decade for it to go mainstream. Probably 2 decades before it's talked about in news shows. and commented on without bias.
ReplyDeleteBut it has to start sometime, and it has to be continued. Congrats to SO for finally openly bringing out what so many Europeans are privately thinking.
There should be no automatic assumption of "this" should be the way forward, or "that" should be the path.
ReplyDeleteThe open discussion says to everyone not to be be afraid or ashamed, just talk honestly.
It should never, ever be shut down, censored or shamed - if it is, then that's another sign of fascism in the West - which is why we are talking here in the first place.