Angela Merkel's 'EU army' explained

The notion proposed by France's President Macron that Europe should have its own army, and by that he meant the E.U., was promptly supported by the German chancellor.  The proposal has met with incredulity and derision.  The more appropriate reaction would be alarm.

Firstly, it is passing strange that these two individuals should start taking an interest in defense. Germany has let its armed forces run down to the point that it doesn't have any submarines it can put to sea, and a fraction of its fighter force is able to get into the air, with similar stories in its helicopters and other systems.  Merkel has been chancellor of Germany for 13 years, so the parlous state of Germany's military reflects her priorities.  There is evidence that Merkel is the fruit of a long-term influence campaign by the former East German intelligence service.  Similarly, with Macron, the head of the French military quit last year after the president made a surprise €850-million cut to the country's defense budget.  And now he wants to pony up for the expense of a whole new army?

And who do they expect to fight?  Russia is the only power in the region, and the Russians don't have the horsepower to mount a large-scale attack.  The Russian economy is only slightly larger than Australia's.

One clue is that Macron and Merkel are talking about only an army – no navy or air force.  If you don't have an air force, then you don't get far on the ground.  That is the first clue about whom they think the new E.U. army will be fighting.  It won't be any country with an air force.

Another clue is the E.U. crackdown on private ownership of guns.  The E.U. even coerced Switzerland into changing its gun laws.  The E.U. restricts Swiss access to the European market to get what it wants.

The E.U. is afraid of an armed citizenry, which might rebel against the self-perpetuating regime in Brussells.  E.U. bureaucrats know that their diktats with respect to immigration and other matters are deeply unpopular and that an insurrection might break up their empire.  Their model in coping with that is the Austro-Hungarian empire, which was made up of a multitude of ethnicities that didn't have a common language or heritage.  That empire kept order by raising military units in one ethnicity and stationing them in a province that didn't speak the language of the soldiers.  This meant that orders to shoot civilians were more likely to be carried out.

The new E.U. army will be Europeans killing their fellow Europeans so that Brussells remains in charge.  That is what it is all about.

David Archibald is the author of American Gripen: The Solution to the F-35 Nightmare.

The notion proposed by France's President Macron that Europe should have its own army, and by that he meant the E.U., was promptly supported by the German chancellor.  The proposal has met with incredulity and derision.  The more appropriate reaction would be alarm.

Firstly, it is passing strange that these two individuals should start taking an interest in defense. Germany has let its armed forces run down to the point that it doesn't have any submarines it can put to sea, and a fraction of its fighter force is able to get into the air, with similar stories in its helicopters and other systems.  Merkel has been chancellor of Germany for 13 years, so the parlous state of Germany's military reflects her priorities.  There is evidence that Merkel is the fruit of a long-term influence campaign by the former East German intelligence service.  Similarly, with Macron, the head of the French military quit last year after the president made a surprise €850-million cut to the country's defense budget.  And now he wants to pony up for the expense of a whole new army?

And who do they expect to fight?  Russia is the only power in the region, and the Russians don't have the horsepower to mount a large-scale attack.  The Russian economy is only slightly larger than Australia's.

One clue is that Macron and Merkel are talking about only an army – no navy or air force.  If you don't have an air force, then you don't get far on the ground.  That is the first clue about whom they think the new E.U. army will be fighting.  It won't be any country with an air force.

Another clue is the E.U. crackdown on private ownership of guns.  The E.U. even coerced Switzerland into changing its gun laws.  The E.U. restricts Swiss access to the European market to get what it wants.

The E.U. is afraid of an armed citizenry, which might rebel against the self-perpetuating regime in Brussells.  E.U. bureaucrats know that their diktats with respect to immigration and other matters are deeply unpopular and that an insurrection might break up their empire.  Their model in coping with that is the Austro-Hungarian empire, which was made up of a multitude of ethnicities that didn't have a common language or heritage.  That empire kept order by raising military units in one ethnicity and stationing them in a province that didn't speak the language of the soldiers.  This meant that orders to shoot civilians were more likely to be carried out.

The new E.U. army will be Europeans killing their fellow Europeans so that Brussells remains in charge.  That is what it is all about.

David Archibald is the author of American Gripen: The Solution to the F-35 Nightmare.