Which sucks, because Kalmar is kind of a cool name, but if the Norwegians are going to feel shitty about it, we gotta win them over somehow.
OK, how to get around NATO and the EU 🤔
Conversation
So I think the EU is actually the easier one. Either we strong-arm the Norwegians to join (of course we have to convince the Euros to let Canada in too)...
or we negotiate a Kalmarexit. Of course, because Canada and the four northern states (I can't remember if there is a...
1
1
collective description that fits all four of Denmark, Finland, Norway & Sweden; I think "Nordic" and "Scandinavian" only fit three of four, and its not the same three)...anyways, we've got superior diplomats, so we won't f*** up a Kalexit the way the Brits are doing it.
2
1
I think in case of Finland the obvious problem would be is that the average Finn is pretty proud of the independent status of our country, due to historical reasons. Joining in with the Swedes would be, suspicious. In your speculation, how to overcome that?
2
1
I also think NATO membership is actually a mistake for EU and for hypothetical. It's a US-dominated system by design.
This project is about independence from US hegemony on trade, security, military. NATO membership undermines that.
Outsourcing mil to US is a cost saver, but...
2
1
But the opportunity cost is far, far greater than the cost of actually maintaining troops. US mil is massively bloated and inefficient, so not a good comparison.
European coalition army would exceed US capabilities at much lower cost, from not needing coercive forward ops.
2
1
If you want a strategic alignment, make it *asian*. Get China and Russia on board with a military entente & trade deals in exchange for breaking of US sanctions.
Both of these countries are hugely dependent on trade, and militarily of much lower capabilities than the hype...
1
1
Holy shit. OK Kalmar policy makers will have some really interesting geopolitical debates.
I think, though, that one of the unifying "substrates" for the Kalmar project is our shared humanitarian ideals, our roles as idealistic middle powers, and our social democratic practice
2
1
I'm thinking about people like Nansen, and his work to negotiate peaceful arrangements for migration in the wake of WWI
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fridtjof_
1
1
Kalmar is not just a breakout play to create a new amoral power centre. Kalmar would have to be very careful about aligning with Russia (in its current iteration). And would a tight alliance with the surveillance state of China be the right path forward?
1
1
Not saying tight relations. It would be conditional on curtailment of current expansionism.
(Less Maidan snipers, more "we will literally invade you if you touch Ukraine again.")
This is a credible threat to Russia. It cannot beat a militarized Europe. It would be a walkover.