Hanging from Les Grandes Miseres de la guerre (Miseries and Misfortunes of War) by Jacques Callot, 1632. Atrocity of the Thirty Year War, 1618-1648, fought in Central Europe. This was a religious war sparked by the Reformation war of the sixteenth century fought in Germany. Wikipedia Public Domain.
Prologue
On December 20, 2025, the European Union (EU) almost crossed the Rubicon. It tried seizing Russian financial assets in Belgium for funding and continuing the hopeless and bloody eleven-year war in Ukraine, under the fake excuse of Russian “reparations” to Ukraine. An Indian newspaper described and warned of the consequences of the evolving tragedy this way:
“Seize Frozen Russian Assets for Ukraine War Funding? Brussels eyes €90B “reparations loan” from matured bonds in Euroclear. Belgium warns of lawsuits, retaliation – Russia could grab €127B European assets [in Russia]. Putin calls it “theft.” Risk global financial chaos or lifeline for Kyiv?”
The answer is both. The refusal of Hungary and the warnings of Belgium stopped the EU’s grabbing of Russian assets. Yet to understand this EU provocative and hostile act, we need to have some historical background.
History matters
Western Europeans in the twenty-first century, mainly France, Germany, Holland, Italy and Austria, including the non-European country of England, have been opposing Russia for centuries. The reasons for the hostility cross religion, culture and the unique geostrategic position of Russia. Christianity in Russia came from the Greeks in the ninth century. Russians became “Orthodox.” But since the fifth century the Western Europeans, who in the fifth century were mostly barbarian inhabitants of the collapsing Roman Empire, were overwhelmingly “Catholic” by imperial fiat and under the leadership of the Pope in Rome. In the sixteenth century War of the Reformation, German “Protestants” violently separated themselves from the Pope. England shared the Christianity of the post-sixteenth century Germany. Indeed, the British shaped Protestant Christianity to fit the whims of their monarchs.
These powers, before and after they took their modern state form, Germany, France, Holland, Italy, Austria and England did not like Russia for more than different version of Christianity. They were afraid of Russia, the largest country on the planet for centuries. England in particular, did not wish to see Russia move south, in the Aegean and the Mediterranean because it feared Russia might disrupt its Indian trade landlines through the territory of the Ottoman Mongols. England always supported the Muslim and jihadist alien country of the Mongol Ottoman Turks as a possible obstacle to Russia. It cared less that the Mongols had occupied the land of the Greeks. England preferred the genocidal country of the Ottoman Turks to independent Greece, whose territory the Mongol Ottoman Turkey captured in 1453. And when the Greeks managed to defeat the Mongol Turks in the 1820s and gained their freedom as an independent nation state, the British and the French and the Austrians were unhappy. Some of their scholars had studied Greek history and were aware of the ancient greatness of Hellenic science and civilization. They had racist notions about modern Greeks. They did not help the Greeks to recover their land occupied by the Moslem Turks. In fact, England and possibly France probably funded the assassination of the first Greek President, Ioannes Kapodistrias, on September 27, 1831.
Kapodistrias was a genius in diplomacy. He became the Secretary of State of Russia, 1816-1822. He saved France from being divided after the defeat of Napoleon and created the neutrality constitution of Switzerland. Russia, France and England appointed him the President of Greece in 1828. But England did not appreciate Kapodistrias’ nation state building efforts, so, with Kapodistrias’ Greek enemies, England destroyed Kapodistrias. The “great” powers, Russia, England, France, sent a German king to rule Greece. That way, they made certain they would do to Greece whatever they pleased.
The first confrontation between Russia and Western Europeans took place during the Crimean War, 1853-1856. France and England and parts of Italy, under the name of the kingdom of Sardinia, joined the Ottoman empire against the Russian empire in order to prevent the collapse of Turkey.
However, the Ottoman empire / Turkey dissolved after WWI, 1914-1918, and, once again, England, France, Italy and the US came to the support of Turkey in order to grab its petroleum in Iraq, and to block Russia from moving towards the Aegean. In that process, they wrecked the Greek army, which they had sent against Turkey in Asia Minor, 1919-1922. The Greek army captured most of the Turkish territory, reaching the outskirts of Ankara. But all their victories were for nothing, as the Europeans, US and Soviet Union funded, trained and armed the Turkish army.
The West also invaded Russia during the Russian Revolution and civil war, 1917-1921. England, France and the US tried to destroy the Bolsheviks to no avail. The Western invaders caused destruction but indirectly consolidated the Russian Revolution. Russians did not exactly like foreigners trying to capture their country.
World War II, 1939-1945, tested the precarious balance of power in Europe with or without Russia that had become communist Soviet Union. Now the Germans, like in WWI, became the catalyst for mechanized war, slaughter and destruction on a massive scale, and the key role of the Soviet Union in crushing the barbarian Germans.
Continuing with its love affair with Turkey, England kept arming Turkey while preventing it from entering WWII. There’s little doubt England knew that Turkey was supporting Hitler’s Germany. On the other hand, Greece won the first victory of WWII with her defeat of larger Italian armies in Albania. England, however, did all it could to push Greece into the ruthless German war machine. But the paradoxical fact of WWII was that the Soviet Union fought on the side of England and the US. Communist Soviet troops fought the German invaders to death. The Germans killed about 25 million Russians but lost the war in their invasion of the Soviet Union / Russia. Exactly like the Russian winter, scorch earth strategy and Russian soldiers killed Napoleon’s troops in Moscow in 1812.
The Soviet leader Stalin and the US President Franklin D. Roosevelt, 1933-1945, ended WWII and controlled Europe. They punished the criminal Nazi German leaders. Unfortunately, Roosvelt died and President Harry S. Truman, 1945-1953, imported Nazi scientists and engineers for their skills in weapons. Moreover, Truman’s advisors invented the national security threat of Soviet communism, thus precipitating the Cold War, 1945-1989, between Western Europe-US against the Soviet Union / Russia.
The “end” of the Cold War in 1989-1990 did not in fact diminish the Western NATO hostility towards the non-communist Russia. The NATO powers headed by the US were not impressed that the Soviet Union abandoned its empire and dissolved its imperial NATO-like military alliance. On the contrary, NATO took advantage of the disruption and original weakness of the disappearing Soviet Union. The Clinton administration started bombing Yugoslavia, an ally of Russia in Southeastern Europe. Simultaneously, NATO started absorbing former members of the Soviet Union, countries like Bulgaria, Romania, Poland, Hungary. NATO wanted to encircle Russia and bring its nuclear armaments to its borders, hence its subversion of Ukraine and the starting in 2014 of NATO’s war against Russia through Ukraine.
Germany-US
This very brief account brings us back to the present dangerous policy of the EU against Russia. Germany is behind this preposterous but illegal desire to rearm and lead the rest of the members of the EU to a war against Russia. I have no documentary proof, but it seems reasonable to assume that the US is behind Germany’s madness. The US maintains an army of occupation in Germany. The US drafted the constitution of Germany. But the US undid the Potsdam Treaty of 1945 that made illegal the armament of Germany.
Trump is saying he wants the end of the war in Ukraine, but the war continues. Trump also does nothing to stop Germany’s resurgent megalomania. He convinced EU to increase its military spending considerably. But why? Russia is threatening neither the US nor the EU. Does Trump or American policy makers consider the implications of another Nazi-like Germany?
As for France, the country remains silent. That means France is a supporter of Germany and the potential catastrophic war against Russia. Is Macron seeking to revenge the defeat of French troops in Moscow in 1812?
Epilogue
Hungary and Belgium and politicians and intellectuals from Europe, the US and other peace-loving countries should do their best to stop the train of war in the European continent led by Germany and, very possibly, the Trump administration. I cannot imagine the war party intends to push Russia to use its nukes. That would be a real holocaust for Europe and possibly the planet. The most likely alternative to the war of extermination would be a permanent war between Ukraine funded and armed by EU against Russia. In other words, these EU warmongers want to continue the eleven-year war indefinitely. They use Ukraine as a testing ground for new weapons. Conventional high tech warfare is “reinvented in Ukraine.” The increased EU military budgets will fund the purchase of more American weapons for the Ukraine war: keep the American military industrial complex olling while killing Ukrainian and Russian soldiers.
The other, equally damaging, effect of the EU-Ukraine war would be the acceleration of the catastrophic climate chaos. Just like petroleum-powered industrialized farming and car and truck transportation, war is a major, if unspoken, factor behind rising temperatures, deadly heat waves, bomb rains, lasting droughts, stronger and more destructive hurricanes, shrinking groundwater, forest die-offs, and according to the UN Chief, Antonio Guterres, “more floods, more heat and more suffering – everywhere.”
I don’t know what to think of Valiannatos’ summary of historical events that pit Russia and Western Europe in a forever adversary role.
The summary is too sweeping and misses many important facts. For instance, it never mentions the Soviet Unions’ aggressive attack against Finland, in 1939, nor the Soviet Union’s cowardly pact with Hitler to split Poland’s territory. Both of those facts are very important and provide a true picture of the Soviet Union as not being a victim, during WWII, but an aggressor.
Then Vallianatos says and I quote ” In fact, England and possibly France probably funded the assassination of the first Greek President, Ioannes Kapodistrias, on September 27, 1831.” The word “probably” does not belong in a historical setting. The reason for the assassination is well known and very probable, considering the Maniot’s history of lawlessness, pride and revenge. Historical narrative has no room for conspiracy theories and “probably”.
Then, Valianatos continues with his theories on Germany’s decision to re-arm. He says “probably” Trump’s insistence is behind he re-arming. There is no “probably” there. America’s presidents have been complaining of other NATO members not carrying their weight on defense spending, even as far back as during Bush sr’s presidency. Not as loud as Trump, but its certainly not a secret. Germany, being the wealthiest NATO member, after America, should pick up much of the burden. But, where Valianatos is wrong, is that America wants Europe to arm herself to make war against Russia. Greece is arming herself, does that mean that she intends to declare war on Turkey? Of course not. So, why would the EU, or NATO make war?
Valianatos says and I quote “. Germany is behind this preposterous but illegal desire to rearm and lead the rest of the members of the EU to a war against Russia.” The only preposterous idea in the previous sentence is that Valianatos considers defensive arming, as intentions for war.
Not once does Valianatos mention Putin’s aggressive actions. He faults the former Warsaw pact nation for desiring to join NATO, as if they were coerced by NATO, to threaten Russia, while those nations joined of their own free will.. What nation in their right mind, other than Byelorussia, would want to be a Russian ally, when they can be a NATO one? Just the last two years, Finland and Sweden joined NATO, desiring to enhance their nations’ safety. NATO didnt force them to join it.
Valianatos’ historical narrative is selective and one sided. It is misleading.
Bob – you are the one who refuses to accept the fact that the west and NATO promised Russia not to expand eastward after 1990 and they broke their promise – among so many others, including the Minsk agreements. Until you decide to accept this basic fact you lose this argument- period
Nick. My argument was with Valianato’s whitewashing of Russia’s WWII participation.
Your argument that Russia was promised that NATO will not expand Eastword, has merit. However, “promises” don’t mean a thing in today’s world. There was no treaty signed, because the West believed that newly liberated countries from the Warsaw pact, had the right to decide for themselves, if they wanted to be part of NATO. Russia is living in yesterday’s imperial times, when larger countries could decide the fate of smaller ones. Why should any of the former Warsaw pact members not have the option of choosing their nations’ future?
Moreover, NATO, by its charter is a defensive alliance. Not an aggressive one. Article 5 can not be invoked, if the NATO member was the aggressor. After almost 80 years of the NATO alliance’s in existence, no NATO member has been accused of a war of aggression. No NATO member has used the alliance to conquer territory. Russia is using the promise of no NATO expansion as a grievance and a reason to bully her neighbors.
Bob, are you going to suggest that Russia was aggressive before and during WWII and not Germany? Please go ahead and invite the laughter of all historians… Moreover, Russia was the major factor behind the allied victory in WWII and I have ten ways to prove it including the over 25 million victims she offered. NATO’s charter is indignificant: its actions matter and they are all aggressive the past 35 years.
Nick. The Soviet Union conducted an aggressive war against Finland, in 1939, which imitated and mirrored Hitler’s illegal anexations of Austria, Chzeckoslovakia and the France provinces. Moreover, her cowardly pact with Nazi Germany, to divide Poland, by attacking Eastern Poland, while Hitler was attacking the Western part, reminds us the cowardly action of Bulgaria, to take Greek Thrace without firing a shot, in the wake of the German assault.
If Russia hadn’t signed thew Ribbentrope pact and had resisted Poland’s invasion, the war might not have been so prolonged and bloody. Or might not have happened at all. Hitler was determined that he will not be fighting on the Western front, against France and Great Britain, while fighting Russia on the East as had happened in WW I. So, Hitler might not have risked a war. So, Russia enabled Hitler to begin the war, secure in the knowledge of a one front war.
No doubt that the Soviet Union was a big part of the allied final victory. But the amount of dead bodies doesn’t mean much. The Russians had very little regard for human losses, confident that “mother Russia” had plenty more men to take the place of the fallen. But that’s not how you fight wars. This is what’s happening today in Ukraine. Russians are losing more men in a week, than America lost in 10 years in Iraq .
Nick, publish this and I invite any historian to laugh at it.
I am not here to play the defender of the Soviet Union. Especially under the monster called Stalin. But it was Hitler’s aggression that started the war no matter how you slice it. And Hitler’s attack on the USSR it was openly or hiddenly supported initially by Britain. Let’s not conveniently forget that after the end of the war in 1945 Churchill was considering for a while to re-arm Germany and turn it against the USSR again in the infamous “Operation Unthinkable”… Look it up – it will sharpen your “historical” knowledge… Or should I remind you that the US used former Wermacht and Nazi officers to re-built the US Army, the CIA – not to mention the Space Program and Von Brown….
and let’s also recall that ( the way way overrated ) General Patton wanted to continue invading into the USSR. His oh so charitable commentary on ” the russian ” : ” The difficulty in understanding the Russian is that we do not take cognizance of the fact that he is not a European, but an Asiatic, and therefore thinks deviously. We can no more understand a Russian than a Chinaman or a Japanese, and from what I have seen of them, I have no particular desire to understand them, except to ascertain how much lead or iron it takes to kill them. In addition to his other Asiatic characteristics, the Russian has no regard for human life and is an all out son of bitch, barbarian, and chronic drunk. “
The NATO creep upon Russian borders since 1990 has been startling! One should look at a map of all the bases built, pointing directly at Russia. When Russia has called them out, NATO uses word-salad excuses or lame reasoning and the creep continued.
PEACE time economies do not make billions for the US Military-Industrial complex, they need war or at minimum conflicts. The MI complex is likely in a pretty bad pinch since Trump has been a mostly peace-time President in his 2 terms.
Nick, Mr. Karp is partially right. For example, Stalin did ally himself with Hitler, prior to their both invading Poland. It’s also true about the Soviet Union invading Finland. But the situation here does not compare with the current Russian operation in Ukraine. The Finns weren’t shooting across the border, they weren’t trying to provoke incidents, they weren’t going after people for speaking Russian in public.
Also, the Soviet Union is no more. I may not be the biggest fan of Putin. But only someone totally blind can fail to see the rebirth of Orthodoxy in Russia today. Some will point to Patriarch Kirill having served the Soviets in the past. But at this point in time, the majority of bishops in Russia have been consecrated after the fall of communism. Communism was no threat to the prince of this world. The Church is, hence the current hatred of Russia from many in today’s world.