Is Europe sleepwalking toward a war with Russia?

Will the Russia–Ukraine war evolve into a Europe–Russia war? This is the question being asked at the current stage. If we listen to European politicians, such a war appears inevitable. Statements made by many European political leaders—especially those of the United Kingdom, France, and Germany—point in this direction. They have made a macro-level decision for transformation. They have mobilized all available resources to rapidly convert their economies into war-centered economies. Despite Russia’s repeated objections, we are witnessing how a mentally constructed notion of “Russian aggression” has hardened into an unyielding preconception: if it is not stopped in Ukraine, it will invade Europe. They are now preoccupied with and anxious about preparing their own public opinion for this scenario.

We should not forget that beyond being a political blunder, this picture also has a material foundation. Particularly troubling news is coming from Germany, the economic engine of the continent. As underlined in the U.S. Security Strategy Report, European economies are experiencing a rapid decline and contraction. The most reliable way to revive stagnating and shrinking economies is war. Our historical and theoretical knowledge teaches us this. In other words, war is an economic value. War is embedded in economies. The deceptive aspect of peacetime is that it obscures the reality that strong economies always keep the war industry alive. The consumption of weapons produced in peacetime takes place outside the places where they are manufactured. Modern peace is nothing more than a system in which those who produce weapons do not consume them directly, while that consumption is distributed across semi-core or peripheral worlds. After the Second World War, in which approximately 85 million people were killed, the core world supposedly achieved peace. They stopped fighting among themselves. Yet by the 2000s, we know that in the rest of the world—from Africa to Asia and Latin America—the numerous wars and civil wars that erupted across vast and scattered geographies resulted in a death toll approaching that same number. This means that the end of the Second World War did not bring peace to the world. Wars were simply spread out across time and geography.

The fact that we are now beginning to speak of the possibility of a Third World War is nothing other than the movement of the dynamics of war from the periphery back toward the core. The reason for this is that over the past 500 years, capital has begun shifting from the Atlantic geography to the Pacific geography. The cultural shock this has produced has never been experienced before. For example, the movement of capital from the Netherlands to France or England, or from there to the United States, was of course crisis-ridden and confrontational; but ultimately it did not produce a cultural shock. These were relocations within a similar geocultural axis, and over time they were absorbed. But when the subject is China, the situation changes. There is now a geocultural rupture. From this stage onward, geoculture will begin to determine geopolitical structures as well. Indeed, that is what has happened. The Christian and White supremacist mindset has begun to feel the need to purify itself both culturally and ideologically. The debates currently dominating the Western agenda are nothing more than conflicts over the answers to what and how this purification process excludes. The scenarios of war will also change according to the nature of these answers.

There are two answers on the table. The first is the answer given by Europe. But here we must clearly explain what we mean by Europe. Europe is not limited solely to the European continent. It must be evaluated together with its extension in the United States. That is, Europe as represented in the U.S.—particularly by the Democrats—must also be included in the continent. Their primary target is a depth stretching into the heart of Eurasia and Asia. In their view, this places Russia squarely in the crosshairs. Before the great confrontation with China, these geographies must be brought down, according to them. They receive their greatest support from financial capital and neoconservatives. We can easily see that their ideological world is highly complex. Above all, they turn democracy, human rights, the rule of law, and similar so-called Western “liberal” value superiorities into their articles of faith. They do not hesitate to add the fragilities and sensitivities of the middle classes to this mix. Woke leftism is an extremely useful lever for them in this context. They rigidly defend themes such as environmentalism, the promotion of green energy use, animal rights, LGBT movements and their derivatives, and multiculturalism. Those who do not declare allegiance to these values and support them are turned into enemies in the most fascistic ways imaginable, without a moment’s hesitation. I describe this as a covert, sugar-coated, powdered form of fascism.

The second answer arises from an objection to this approach. According to this view, the United States should separate itself from Europe, enter into a line of alignment with Russia, and gain an overwhelming advantage against China. Their intention is to vassalize Europe. In addition, by leveraging Russia–India friendship, they aim to extend the Spice Route via the Indian Ocean to the Mediterranean, incorporating the Arab states tied to Israel through the Abraham Accords. Their greatest desire is to plunder global raw material resources, establish complete dominance over trade routes, and thereby corner and weaken China. The maritime dimension is also intended to be reinforced in the Eastern Mediterranean through the Greek Cypriot Administration and Greece. Major energy companies and the information technology industry predominantly support this movement. Military power is for them more a tool of intimidation and pressure. This is why they appear peaceful. Otherwise, on the ideological plane, we see that they have a base nourished by the lowest middle-class strata, embracing White supremacy in the most racist terms, almost in a Ku Klux Klan style. Rather than international wars, they seek to channel this militarist energy inward, mobilizing it against masses piled up by irregular migration, whom they regard as foreign and believe are polluting their “civilization.” Islamophobia is the most combustible element here. Just as Europe has an American leg, the United States also has a European leg. The rise of the European right demonstrates exactly this. They appear set to complete the vassalization of Europe.

In short, Europe is in a state of complete convulsion. It is striving to prolong the Russia–Ukraine war, to transform it into a Europe–Russia war, and to draw the United States into it as well. The arrow has left the bow. Pulling back together is now very difficult.