Showing posts with label EU. Show all posts
Showing posts with label EU. Show all posts

Tuesday, September 1, 2026

Captain Obvious of the Euro-Titanic | Laura Ru

On August 27, at a business forum in Paris, Führerin Ursula von der Leyen stated the obvious: the former advantages of the European economy have all disappeared. The European economic model, she explained, had rested on several pillars: cheap imported energy from Russia, open global trade, growing access to the Chinese market, US strategic protection, and Western technological leadership.

What von der Leyen chose not to mention was that these advantages did not disappear by accident. They were systematically destroyed by the very institution she leads, through sanctions that severed energy and economic ties with Russia, a trade war against China, and regulatory overreach that suffocated European industry.

Russian officials have watched Europe's self-inflicted wounds with a mixture of bewilderment and dark amusement. Maria Zakharova, the official spokesperson for Russia's Foreign Ministry, responded to von der Leyen's confession with a single, devastating epithet: "Captain Obvious of the Euro-Titanic." From Beijing, the critique is no less damning. Chinese analysts have watched Europe's protectionist turn with growing frustration, arguing that the EU is destroying the very thing it claims to protect: its own industrial competitiveness.
The EU's share of global GDP has plummeted from 30% in 2008 to just 17% in 2025—a decline three times faster than that of China's Qing Dynasty during its collapse. And as one Chinese commentator put it, while the Qing fell to foreign invasion, Europe's decline is "self-inflicted, purely something Europe has brought upon itself."
It is, in the words of one Chinese analyst, "locking protectionism directly into its economic and trade policy system." European decision-makers, Chinese commentators argue, have lost touch with basic economic reality. They are absolutely right. This is a systemic crisis that permeates Europe's decision-making circles. Both Moscow and Beijing see the same tragic irony. Europe has spent years lecturing the world about rules and order, about strategic autonomy and economic resilience. Yet in its rush to punish Russia and contain China, it has torn down the very foundations of its own prosperity.
In Paris, the Führerin zeroed in on Europe's €10 trillion in household bank deposits, branding them "lazy" (paresseuse) capital that must be forced "to the service of European companies" through her Savings and Investment Union. Explicit plan: securitize them, supervise them. Coming for your savings, Europe.
Europe's energy prices are now two to three times higher than in the US and China. Its industrial base, once the envy of the world, is bleeding jobs and capacity. Its share of global markets continues to shrink. And its leaders, having created the crisis with their own hands, can only stand by and admit that the old model is gone. They are clearly batting for another team, one that demands Europe throw itself off the cliff.
 
Laura Ru (pen name of Laura Ruggeri) is a Milan-born Italian independent researcher, writer, and geopolitical analyst based in Hong Kong since 1997. A former academic in media and cultural studies, she focuses on multipolarity, international relations, US foreign policy, China–EU relations, and European political economy. She publishes long-form essays and commentary on  Substack, Medium, and Telegram.

Friday, August 28, 2026

CIA, MI6, and Mossad Own Europe's Political Class | Col. Lawrence Wilkerson

I take a grim satisfaction from knowing exactly what we did. I know how painstakingly the CIA, MI6 (SIS), and to a certain extent Mossad worked to shape today's Europe. Though Mossad was not initially a willing partner, they eventually joined in once they saw the money involved. To borrow a phrase from certain Asian scholars, we "taught the dogs to bark." 
 
» We bought entire countries' political apparatuses. «
 
We bought newspaper editors, labor union heads, and parliamentarians. We purchased two NATO Secretary-Generals—Jens Stoltenberg and Mark Rutte. We bought entire countries' political apparatuses, starting in earnest around 2002, when billions of CIA dollars began flowing. USAID was the instrument; we weaponized liberal democracy.
 
2022: Biden, with Reich Governor Scholz at his side, promised to
terminate Nord Stream 2. And the perfect lackey just kowtowed.

In that respect, I supported what Trump and Rubio did to the extent that they purged the lower-level operatives who executed these policies—though I did not support their removal of top bureaucrats. But we created the Europe that exists today, on purpose. And now we are paying the piper. It will take another six to eighteen months to root out many of these figures, and God knows how long to cleanse the parliaments. We painstakingly crafted Europe in our own image.

From Anti‑War to Neo‑Con
I recall the anti-war fervor of 2003, when the US invasion of Iraq was seen as outrageous, aggressive, and counterproductive across Europe. The hawks—figures like Colin Powell and Dick Cheney—were despised and ridiculed. Those days are gone. Today's European leaders are indistinguishable from the US neoconservatives of that era. The reaction to George W. Bush back then was a call to battle for that administration, and they set all this in motion.

1965: Humberto Delgado, Portuguese Air Force General, prominent opposition leader against the Estado
Novo dictatorship of António de Oliveira Salazar; assassinated by NATO/CIA/MI6 stay-behind operatives.
 
 
1978: Aldo Moro, leader of the Christian Democracy party, Prime Minister of Italy, and chief architect
of the "Historic Compromise", a coalition government that would bring the  Communist Party (PCI)
into the ruling cabinet; assassinated by NATO/CIA/MI6 stay-behind operatives.
 
1986: Olof Palme, Swedish Prime Minister, leader of the Social Democratic Party, staunch promoter
of the welfare state and Third World liberation movements, condemned the US war in Vietnam and
the apartheid regime in South Africa; assassinated by NATO/CIA/MI6/Mossad stay-behind operatives.

1989: Alfred Herrhausen, Chairman of Deutsche Bank, visionary leader, active promoter of
German-Russian economic relations, and highly influential advisor to Chancellor Helmut Kohl; 
assassinated by NATO/CIA/MI6/Mossad stay-behind operatives. 
  
1991: Detlev Karsten Rohwedder, president of the Treuhandanstalt, the German government agency
tasked with privatizing East German state-owned enterprises, was considered insufficiently flexible
toward certain foreign demands; assassinated by NATO/CIA/MI6/Mossad stay-behind operatives.
 
2003: Jürgen Möllemann, prominent German politician from the Free Democratic Party,
 president of the German-Arab Society, outspoken critic of Israel and promoter of the
Palestinian cause; assassinated by NATO/CIA/MI6/Mossad stay-behind operatives. 
 
2008: Jörg Haider, Austrian right-wing populist politician, governor of Carinthia and
harsh anti-Zionist; assassinated by NATO/CIA/MI6/Mossad stay-behind operatives.
 
Et cetera et cetera et cetera:
 murder, slaughter, genocide: children, women, heads of state; terrorism; intimidation; weapon, drug, organ, 
child trafficking; well poisoning; pedophilia; hijacking; torturing; counterfeiting; looting; piracy; bribery...
 
Forging the CIA
The CIA had never before operated on such a scale. Harry Truman greatly objected to the agency's formation, initially, but he was eventually sold out by William "Wild Bill" Donovan and J. Edgar Hoover—despite Hoover's hatred for Donovan. It is a strange history, but the agency bought this new mission lock, stock, and barrel because it knew billions would pour its way. And indeed they did. They set about changing the European attitude. When the largest anti-war rally in British—and possibly European—history erupted in London in 2003, we did not like that at all. We set out to reverse it.
» NATO's purpose is: Keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down. «
Lord General Hastings Lionel Ismay, 1st Baron Ismay, NATO's first Secretary General, 1952.


1952: Stalin proposed reunifying Germany as a demilitarized, neutral state. Chancellor Adenauer rejected it as "Soviet ruse," prioritizing West Germany's US/British/French occupation regime
over national sovereignty and unity; remained in power and lived to 91. 
Cultivating Stoltenberg
How close was I to this? I was up close and personal in getting Jens Stoltenberg to his position. We saw what he did within his own government, recognized how malleable and susceptible he was to our messaging, and used him as a center pole from which to extend our influence into other governments. He was willing because he knew we had promised him the NATO Secretary-General post. I did not see the infection of the EU up close, but I am sure it followed chapter and verse alongside our manipulation of NATO leadership.
 
 
NATO's Top‑Heavy Bloat
That effort was not difficult. You must understand the history of NATO's top-heavy flag structure. Every time we built a headquarters and placed a three- or four-star general there, the Europeans felt compelled to match us. We built this incredible overhead of flag officers—Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps—across Europe, and they were so influenceable that all you had to do was whisper in their ear. Suddenly, you had this pliant NATO military leadership doing your bidding. The CIA merely had to whisper about Russia, building up the threat as needed.


Russophobia as Propaganda
This Russophobia began early—with Boris Yeltsin's disappearance and Vladimir Putin's arrival on the scene. That is when we started using fear of Russia as a propaganda instrument. In the Dutch media, it was exposed that Mark Rutte, while Prime Minister, would excuse Israeli actions and adopt extra-hawkish positions on Russia and Yemen, all to look good on his job application for NATO. They knew exactly what the Americans would reward.

Since 1871, the US/Anglo prime geopolitical doctrine for Europe:
"Keep Germany and Russia separate and in conflict."
[Or, as Victoria Nuland put it in 2014: "Fuck the EU!"]
 
20
26: Pete Blaber, former US Delta Force Commander, on the 
truth
about the NATO/CIA/MI6/Mossad war against Russia in Ukraine.
  
Weaponizing Historical Guilt
We were also acutely aware—particularly in Germany, but elsewhere too—of how deeply the Holocaust lingered over European consciousness. With Mossad's assistance, we exploited that guilt to the maximum. This is why Germany has the laws and regulations it does regarding anti-Semitism today; we helped build them.
 
Reference: 
 
»
They lose their jobs if there is peace. «  
Lawrence B. Wilkerson (b. 1945) is a retired US Army colonel and former senior government official. A 31-year Army and Vietnam veteran, he became closely associated with Colin Powell in 1989, serving as his assistant as Powell completed his tenure as President Reagan’s National Security Advisor. Wilkerson remained with Powell through his tenure as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, into civilian life, and, when Powell became Secretary of State under George W. Bush, as his Chief of Staff from 2002 to 2005. He later became a prominent critic of the Iraq War, expressing particular regret over his role in preparing Powell's infamous 2003 UN Security Council presentation on Iraq's alleged weaponized anthrax. Since retiring in 2005, Wilkerson has held academic posts at the US Naval War College and College of William and Mary. He is a fellow of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft and a member of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, and regularly comments on US foreign policy, the Middle East, and national security.

Sunday, August 16, 2026

Gold Bull 2027-2032, Monetary Reset & EU Breakup | Martin Armstrong

Martin Armstrong correctly forecast the recent six-month correction in Gold and Silver, with Gold falling roughly 30% from $5,600 to $3,900 and Silver about 55% from $121 to $55. Both have since rebounded—Gold near $4,500 and Silver above $66—but Armstrong sees this as potentially only an oversold bounce. 
 
» Gold and Silver bull market from Q1 2027 into 2032. «

He argues that precious metals hedge primarily against government, not inflation: Gold fell for 19 years from 1980–1999 despite rising government debt. The current correction reflects growing market complacency over Iran and Ukraine, while smarter money recognizes that neither conflict is likely to resolve cleanly. Armstrong expects the decisive structural turn in Q1 2027, launching a sustained metals bull market into roughly 2032, followed by a monetary resetmarking the peak of the current public-debt cycle and a systemic shift away from pure fiat structuresCentral banks lack effective tools against cost-push inflation from such shocks.
 
» This will lead to dramatic changes. «
 
The EU risks breakup by around 2029. Europe's trajectory increasingly resembles the systems Eastern Europeans fled. Governments act solely in their own interest; free-speech and media constraints (illustrated during COVID and through pressure on journalists) demonstrate the pattern. Energy attacks by Ukraine on Russian oil infrastructure are already creating shortages that force Russia toward imports and are expected to drive energy prices higher.

Saturday, August 8, 2026

The Slow Demise of France’s Enduring Colonial Currency System in Africa

There is a currency circulating across 14 African nations. Designed in Paris, printed in France, it required for decades that its users deposit up to half their foreign reserves in the French Treasury. Called the CFA franc (officially Communauté Financière Africaine, i.e. African Financial Community), it has operated continuously since 1945. The same instrument created to control and manage France's colonial possessions in sub-Saharan Africa still functions in many ways today. More than 155 million people use it; 14 formally sovereign nations depend on it. And the debate over whether it represents stability or subjugation has never been louder.

UEMOA + CEMAC + Comoros = CFA franc zone.
 
A country that controls another country's currency controls that economy. France understood this better than almost anyone. While the British pound zone dissolved France held on and the invisible scaffolding linking Paris to Dakar, Abidjan, Yaoundé and Libreville has never been dismantled.

Return to 1945. Europe lies in ruins. France, liberated from Nazi Germany, struggles to feed itself. Inflation spirals; the metropolitan franc loses value weekly. Across the Atlantic the Bretton Woods agreements establish the postwar financial order: the gold-backed dollar as global anchor, every nation required to declare its currency's value to the new IMF. France's shattered economy forces a sharp devaluation of the metropolitan franc against the dollar.
 
West African CFA franc—fiat bills with zero intrinsic value, backed
only by an ECB-mandated fixed exchange rate to the euro.
 
De Gaulle's finance minister Pleven applies different rates to the metropole and the colonies. In France the franc falls hard. In French West Africa, French Equatorial Africa, and the Comoros a new currency is born at a stronger rate: one CFA franc equals 1.7 metropolitan francs. By 1948 the ratio is two to one. The colonies suddenly possess a currency stronger than France's own.

Presented as generosity, the mechanics tell another story. A strong currency in a raw-material exporter that imports finished goods acts as an import subsidy and export tax. It cheapens French manufactures for the colony and makes the colony’s own goods less competitive abroad. From day one the CFA franc's pricing structure channeled African purchasing power toward French industry and quietly strangled the development of competitive local export sectors. Solid Rothschild architecture designed to endure.

A fixed exchange rate set below equilibrium creates excess demand for foreign currency
(Qd > Qs), which the central bank must cover by selling reserves to maintain the peg.
 
And its original name said everything: Colonies Françaises d’Afrique—French Colonies of Africa. No euphemism. Notes were printed then, and still are, in Chamalières by the Banque de France. Four pillars underpinned the system and proved remarkably durable: a fixed exchange rate with the French franc (later the euro) guaranteeing unlimited convertibility by the French Treasury; free capital movement between the CFA zone and France; and the operations account requiring the zone's central banks to deposit a large share of foreign-exchange reserves in the French Treasury.

At founding that share was 100 percent. By 1973 it fell to 65 percent; by 2005 to a 50 percent ceiling. Even at half, 'sovereign nations' handed over half their foreign exchange wealth to a former colonial power in exchange for a guarantee against currency collapse. Defenders cite stability: relatively low inflation compared with much of Africa, insulation from crises that wrecked Zimbabwe or Venezuela. Outside one massive 1994 devaluation the CFA franc has tracked the French franc and then the euro almost lockstep for nearly eighty years. But stability for whom, and at what cost?
Viral 2019 Italian TV clip of Giorgia Meloni (then opposition leader, now Prime Minister) holding a CFA franc note and calling it France's "colonial currency" to exploit resources via seigniorage and export controls.  
Pegged at 655.957 CFA francs to the euro, member states cannot adjust the exchange rate to their own conditions. They cannot devalue to boost exports, expand the money supply in a downturn, or set independent interest rates. Monetary policy—the core tool of any sovereign country—is outsourced to the European Central Bank, which sets policy for Germany, France and the Netherlands, not Senegal, Cameroon or Chad. In 2008 and again during the COVID-19 plandemic, countries with sovereign currencies printed money and cut rates; CFA countries could not.

Economists have long argued the franc is chronically overvalued relative to the productive capacity of its users. Overvaluation makes imports cheap and exports expensive—fine for comprador elites buying luxury goods in Paris, devastating for farmers selling cocoa or cotton against competitors with weaker, flexible currencies. The structural result is a permanent tilt toward importing rather than producing and deep dependence on foreign capital. This is a design feature, not an accident.
 
Olympio, murderedlike Kennedyby the small hat money printers in 1963.
 

Sylvanus Olympio, first president of Togo, was elected in 1961 and immediately pushed to leave the CFA system and establish a national central bank. He saw monetary and political sovereignty as inseparable. On January 13, 1963, less than three years after independence, he was assassinated in a coup led by a French-trained sergeant. The new government proved far more amenable to French interests; Togo remained in the CFA zone. Leaders who challenge French economic control tend to meet violent ends or removal; those who cooperate enjoy long, French-supported tenures.

Thomas Sankara, revolutionary leader and president of Burkina Faso, addressing the United Nations General Assembly in New York on October 4, 1984. His speech remains a definitive manifesto for anti-imperialism, global solidarity, and self-reliance.
Sankara—radical anti-imperialist, pan-Africanist and austere leader
prioritized self-reliance, massive social reforms, and integrity.
Murdered by the small hat money printers in 1987. 

The most iconic case is Thomas Sankara. In 1983, aged 33, he seized power in Upper Volta and renamed it Burkina Faso—"land of upright people." He ran mass vaccination campaigns, planted over ten million trees against desertification, banned female genital mutilation, appointed women to high office, refused air-conditioning, drove a modest Renault 5 and cut official salaries including his own. His greatest offense in Paris's eyes was open challenge to the CFA franc and Françafrique—the web of political, military and economic ties binding former colonies to France. On October 15, 1987 he was assassinated in a coup led by his deputy Blaise Compaoré, who then ruled the country for 27 years and reversed the anti-French course. In April 2022 a Burkinabe military tribunal convicted Compaoré and associates in absentia; Compaoré, living in exile in Ivory Coast, received a life sentence. The tribunal confirmed French agents were in Ouagadougou the day after the coup. Sankara's family formally accused France of masterminding the killing. Macron pledged in 2017 to declassify related documents; they have not been fully released.

Françafrique operates on a larger scale still: French bases, advisers inside ministries, preferential access for French firms to African resources, and the CFA franc as monetary backbone. Comprador elites enjoyed convertibility that let them move wealth to Paris, an overvalued currency that made luxury imports affordable, and French political and military protection. Ordinary citizens faced scarce credit, interest rates dictated by European conditions, import competition that crushed local firms, and capital mobility that functioned largely as a one-way valve outward.

France confronts rising anti-French sentiment in West Africa—Bamako,
Mali, 2020: "France get out" demonstration against French, EU and UN forces. 

By the late 1980s the franc was severely overvalued. Commodity prices—cocoa, coffee, cotton, oil—were falling while the French franc appreciated, dragging the CFA with it. On January 12, 1994 the CFA franc was devalued 50 percent overnight. The decision was taken in Paris, not in any African capital. French Prime Minister Édouard Balladur later confirmed it was done at France's instigation "to help these countries in their development." Overnight the purchasing power of roughly 150 million people was halved. Prices of imported food, medicine and fuel doubled; urban poverty surged; foreign-currency public debt effectively doubled. The cost fell entirely on African citizens who had no vote and no veto. The event laid bare the system's reality: sovereign in name, monetary dependencies in fact.

When France joined the euro in 1999 the CFA franc was pegged at 655.957 to the euro—a rate that still holds. The anchor changed; the dynamics did not. Monetary policy is now set by the European Central Bank for a union of wealthy European states with zero representation or accountability to the African economies bound to it. Notes continue to be printed in Chamalières; until recent reforms the operations accounts still funneled reserves to the French Treasury; French representatives sat on the boards of the BCEAO in Dakar and the BEAC in Yaoundé.

 
By the 2010s a new generation of African intellectuals and leaders challenged the system with growing force. Senegalese economist Ndongo Samba Sylla called the CFA franc "an anachronism requiring orderly elimination." In 2015 Chadian President Idriss Déby declared that a "cord preventing development in Africa" must be severed—everyone knew which cord. In 2019 Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni held up a CFA note on television and accused France of exploitation, an accusation that resonated widely.
 
In December 2019, under pressure, Macron and Ivory Coast's Alassane Ouattara announced reforms in Abidjan: the West African CFA franc would become the Eco; the 50 percent reserve deposit requirement would end; French board seats at the BCEAO would disappear; the operations account would close and reserves return to Dakar. Headlines called it historic. The fine print was more cautious: the fixed euro peg remained, French convertibility guarantee continued, and France retained a backup credit line. The most symbolically offensive features were removed; the macro-economically decisive peg stayed.

Muammar Gaddafi's African gold dinar was a 2009-2011 pan-African initiative to introduce a single, gold-backed currency aimed to replace the US dollar and the French-backed CFA franc across Africa, allowing nations to sell oil and resources for gold to achieve complete financial independence from Western systems. Murdered by the small hat money printers in 2011.
Critics call it rebranding. The name Eco had already been chosen for a broader ECOWAS common currency that would have included Nigeria; a francophone-only Eco complicated that project. The reforms covered only the eight West African states. The six Central African users of the BEAC franc—Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon—still deposit 50 percent of reserves in Paris and still have French board representation. As of today, the Eco has not launched; the latest ECOWAS target of 2027 is viewed with widespread skepticism.

Meanwhile the Sahel transformed. Coups between 2020 and 2023 toppled governments in Mali, Burkina Faso, Niger and Guinea, each fueled in part by anti-French sentiment over military presence, European and US sponsored Jihadist terrorism, economic extraction and the CFA franc. In 2024 Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger left ECOWAS and formed the landlocked Alliance of Sahel States, explicitly rejecting French influence and discussing exit from the CFA franc toward national or shared Sahelian currencies. Chad and Senegal demanded withdrawal of French troops, Niger the retreat of the French and Americans. 
 
» The slave that cannot carry out his own revolt deserves no pity. «
Ibrahim Traoré, President of Burkina Faso.
 
Senegal's president Bassirou Diomaye Faye and his prime minister Ousmane Sonko campaigned in 2023 on economic sovereignty; Sonko declared in 2025 that the CFA franc is "both a symbolic and an economic problem." The cry "La France dégage" (France, get out!) has echoed from Niamey to Bamako to Ouagadougou to Dakar, encompassing French military bases, mining concessions and, above all, monetary sovereignty. The CFA franc had become the most visible symbol of unfinished decolonization.

» Jub, Jubal, Jubanti. «
(Be upright, act with integrity, and rectify what is crooked.)
Faye, elected president of Senegal in 2024, had expelled French troops by March 2025 and was
elected Chairman of ECOWAS in July 2026; however, Senegal has not left the CFA franc. Hello Eco...

What replaces it remains complicated. Exit without credible alternatives requires building central-bank capacity, reserve management, monetary-policy frameworks and market confidence from scratch. Countries that left earlier—Guinea in 1960, Madagascar and Mauritania in 1973—faced significant turbulence. Yet defenders must confront the system's record: the 14 CFA countries include some of the world's poorest; Niger, Chad, the Central African Republic and Burkina Faso rank near the bottom of the UN Human Development Index; per-capita GDP remains a fraction of the global average. Eighty years of promised stability have not delivered development, poverty reduction or structural transformation. The question is no longer only whether these countries can afford to leave, but whether they can afford to stay.
 
Dual world map showing each country's largest trading partner (exports + imports) in 2000 vs. 2024 among the US, EU, and China. In 2000, the US led most of the Americas, parts of Asia-Pacific, and some of Africa; the EU dominated Europe, much of Africa and Asia, and parts of South America; China led only a few smaller economies (e.g., Myanmar, Mongolia, North Korea, Oman, Sudan, Yemen). By 2024, China dominates nearly all of Asia, much of Africa, and most of South America; the US retains North America and select South American countries; the EU leads much of Europe and nearby regions but with reduced global reach. China’s total trade rose from $474B (2000) to $6.2T (2024), surpassing both the US and EU.
Why would-should-could all these countries remain in the CFA franc zone? 

A monetary system whose notes are printed in France, whose reserves have historically been held in the French Treasury, whose exchange rate is set by a European institution, and in which the actual users long had no meaningful say, was designed under colonialism, preserved through co-optation, coercion and violence, and maintained by institutional inertia and the complicity of local comprador elites who benefit. 
 
At no point in history has the CFA franc been closer to its demise, just coinciding with the scheduled 2027 rollout of the
Eco—the proposed new ECOWAS common currency, directly pegged to the Euro. Again. One couldn't make this up.
And it just sounds, looks, and smells as fantastic and promising as the Euro...
 
The CFA franc is a monument to the idea that independence can be granted with one hand while economic sovereignty is withheld with the other. The most effective control is not always exercised with guns and borders; sometimes it is exercised with exchange rates, reserve requirements and banknotes printed thousands of kilometers from the pockets that carry them.
 
Whether or when the CFA franc system collapses, adapts once more as the Eco, national sovereign currencies, or something else remains open. What is clear is that a reckoning is already under way across the Sahel and beyond. A new generation asks the question Sankara asked four decades ago: "If a nation does not control its own money, can it truly call itself free?"
 

Sunday, July 5, 2026

Civil War Comes to the West | David Betz

Recognition of the possibility of civil war in the West exists in politics and related punditry and in a range of scholarship. Many people still deny or are reluctant to talk of it. Perhaps they fear a kind of ‘security dilemma’ that might occur; if people become convinced that civil war is coming because important people say so they might behave in ways that cause or hasten it. Equally, one might surmise, some know the truth but are factionally invested in the conflict and are simply positioning over who will be judged by history to have fired the first shot in it.

Henry Nowak, 18, was fatally stabbed in Southampton in April 2026 by Vickrum Digwa
and controversially handcuffed by police as he lay dying, ignited nationwide riots.
 
Neither, in my view, are credible positions to hold when confronted with the unfortunate reality. Theory is generally clear and convincing about the conditions under which civil war is likely to occur. Walton concluded that in any year just under four per cent of the countries in which the conditions of civil war were present would experience it. Accepting this, even as something of a pessimistic baseline, would suggest over the coming decade the collective West is in deep trouble. Moreover, there is little reason to hope that should one kick off in one major country its consequences would not spread more widely to others.

Civil War in Britain: The Why, The How, The When.

Colin Brazier, July 2, 2026.
 
Moreover, it is not simply that the conditions are present in the West; it is, rather, that the conditions are nearing the ideal. The relative wealth, social stability and related lack of demographic factionalism, plus the perception of the ability of normal politics to solve problems that once made the West seem immune to civil war are now no longer valid. 
 
Organized and directed polarization: liberal 'Left', radical 'Islamism', and 
patriotic 'far-right', all infested with Zionist agents, fanning the flames.
 
In fact, in each of these categories the direction of pull is towards civil conflict. Increasingly, people perceive this to be the case and their levels of confidence in government would seem to be declining even more in the face of the apparent unwillingness or inability of leaders to confront the situation honestly. The result, society-wise, is a reinforcing spiral calling to mind the opening lines of Yeats’ famous ‘The Second Coming’.

Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold…

The fact of the matter is that the tools of revolt in the form of various appurtenances of modern life are just lying around, knowledge of how to employ them is widespread, targets are obvious and undefended, and more and more formerly regular citizens seem minded to take the shot.

Assume—based on recent statements by credible national political and academic figures—that at least ten European countries face the risk of violent civil conflict. The table above lists fifteen; discard any five you consider least plausible. Even then, the probability of such conflict occurring in at least one of the remaining countries within five years is 87%—rising to 95% if all fifteen are included.
Normalcy bias’ is a concept originating in disaster management that refers to the way in which people sometimes fail to react in a timely manner to warnings of imminent danger. The defense establishments of the West ought to guard against a tendency to disbelieve or to minimize the threat of internal conflict. The matter is that conditions which are generally agreed to be indicative of the potential for civil war are vividly present across a range of states which have for a long time been thought beyond such sort of conflict.

      » Configured for civil war. « 
In June 2026, an attempted decapitation of an Irish Belfast man by a Sudanese 'asylum seeker' sparked viral outrage
that rapidly escalated into anti-immigrant riots, arson, and widespread disorder across Northern Ireland. 

Strategic studies may be quite caught off guard, moreover, for two other reasons. First, civil wars are little studied in the same manner as interstate wars. The literature on civil wars is extensive, including important works on its causation, resolution, social origins, outcomes, post-war rebuilding and so on; but it is rarely studied, as is ‘normal war’, from the perspective of military strategy—in other words, how it is or should be fought. The work of Stathis Kalyvas, the most astute contemporary observer of the ‘logic’ of civil wars, is a rare exception.
 
All ingredients in play.
 
However, second, even Kalyvas just over a decade ago concluded that in the long view, civil wars were in decline. His further point, though, was that civil war had undergone three major transformations over the last 200 years to, in the last instance, a form which he struggled to describe—one far less ordered and conventional. That form is becoming evident. To suggest that civil war is imminent and ascendant and precisely in parts of the world thought, heretofore, to be the wealthiest and least restive—is contrary to expectation—but that is where we are.

Quoted from:
David Betz (2023) - Civil War Comes to the West. Part 1 and Part 2.
Military Strategy Magazine, Volume 9, Issue 1, summer 2023, pages 20-26. 
Military Strategy Magazine, Volume 10, Issue 2, spring 2025, pages 6-16.  
 
See also:
David J. Betz is Professor of War in the Modern World in the Department of War Studies, King's College London where he heads the MA War Studies program. He is also a Senior Fellow of the Foreign Policy Research Institute.