Macron has set sail. By encompassing other small states, France, Germany, Sweden, Finland, and Poland openly declare their aim to definitively confront Russia by 2025. Statements given make it clear that this goal will be pursued whether or not the US, UK, or NATO are involved. The time in between will be dedicated to preparations.
It seems there's a sort of division of labor happening. The resignation of European and Middle East expert Victoria Nuland and the arrival of Pacific expert John Bass suggest that politically and militarily, US and UK forces will focus on the Pacific, while European forces will confront Russia and, more broadly, Eurasia. The indefinite deployment and settlement of serious military personnel to Taiwan following the aforementioned change in the US administration, the standoff between the Filipino and Chinese navies, can be seen as evidence of this claim.
Many speculate that Trump, if re-elected in November, might temper things down. But this assumption seems problematic in two ways. Firstly, it reveals the dire state of humanity or global public opinion to expect peace from someone notorious for recklessness. Now let's ask: will peace emerge from Trump's economically driven ruthless perspective? Who can claim that Trump, who sees Mexicans as insects, would morally object to the horrific devastation war would bring and take initiative to stop it?
Trump's only grievance with Europe was NATO members neglecting their economic contributions. Otherwise, Trump never made a principled stand against NATO. His only complaint was that NATO burdened the US economy. If Trump were to come to power and a war between Russia and Europe, dated for 2025, were to break out in the meantime, his first move would be to check NATO contribution levels. If past European states, now turned war economies, had met their contribution shares, I doubt he'd put much effort into this war. He'd probably not even mention Article 5 until the last moment and simply provide arms support at a cost, excusing himself with something like "I'm dealing with China. That's my priority."
Putin's desire for Trump's return probably stems from this alone: not wanting to directly confront the US in a war with Europe. Otherwise, Putin, especially as demonstrated in his recent influential and, in my opinion, historic speech, has shown he doesn't expect peace from Trump.
Putin's second calculation is the escalation of US-China tensions, which would create a new front for him. This escalation will relieve pressure in the Pacific, where he has long desired a strategic alliance with China if, for example, a threat arises from Japan. China, which has been hesitant in a Russia-Ukraine or Russia-Europe war, will no longer have that luxury. Moreover, the intensification of Russian-Chinese military exercises in the Pacific and, finally, exercises involving the Russian, Chinese, and Iranian navies in the Indian Ocean can be seen as operational precursors to this.
Another, and in my opinion, stronger reason indicating that there will be no peace from a possible Trump presidency is the spiral the US economy has fallen into. Who can better see the dominant role of the war industry in the recovery of the economy than Trump? If Trump is the same old commercially-minded Trump we know, contrary to the expectations of those expecting peace from him, he will eagerly calculate the economic value of these developments, rather than being bothered by the escalation of affairs. Moreover, it's impossible for him to win the election by opposing the defense industry, which has seen greatly diminished and exceptionally profitable returns during the Biden era.
It seems that the difference between Biden and Trump is not a strategic but purely tactical one in the inevitable global war. The former acted with a priority on Europe-Eurasia. He postponed dealing with China. Trump, on the other hand, by withdrawing from the Europe-Eurasia confrontation, will prioritize the Pacific confrontation. Ultimately, this means the globalization of war. Looking at it from a macro perspective, that is, from the perspective of deep US calculations, it is possible to consider the transitions of power between Biden and Trump as two interconnected chapters of the same book. Probably, if humanity survives and historical writing continues to exist, it will be written like this half a century from now. The deep strategy of the US - we can also call it the Anglo-Saxon alliance - first initiated the Europe-Eurasia war through Biden and drove these two continents against each other. It left China out. Now, through Trump, it targets China. The resignation of Nuland, occurring in the US without causing any sign of sorrow in Biden, happening like an ordinary event, perfectly illustrates this. Despite the numerous shifts currently taking place in the US, it seems that deep strategies are working seamlessly...
