Yoram Hazony Profile picture
Feb 9 11 tweets 2 min read
America has one strategic rival right now: China.

America has one major foreign policy aim: To overtake and ultimately to defeat China in a long cold war that the US is presently losing.

/1
Russia is not a significant threat to the US.

For America, a war with Russia in Ukraine would be a vast diversion of attention and resources in the wrong direction.

The only sure winner of an American war in Ukraine would be China.

/2
No American aim is served by Ukraine joining NATO. No American interest is served by a placing US troops in Ukraine.

Poland, Britain, and France should step up and deal with the Russian challenge to their interests in Ukraine.

It’s time for Europe to assume responsibility.

/3
The claim that the US has to take the lead against Russia in order to “send a signal” to China is misconceived and absurd.

The only signal an American war in Ukraine would send is that the Americans are incompetents who can’t keep their eye on the ball.

/4
If you’re pro-Taiwan, you should see this clearly.

If America sinks its attention and resources into an unnecessary fight with Russia right now, this could easily mean the end of Taiwan.

Think carefully about this.

/5
What if Poland, Britain, and France are not up to the challenge at this time?

Then they should do what every nation does when it faces a serious security threat: They should arm themselves and prepare for the next round.

/6
What are the options in Ukraine?

European statesmen have to consider whether a neutral Ukraine, or a negotiated change in Ukraine’s border, is worse than war.

If they don’t have the military capacity to deter Russia yet, they need to buy time to build that capacity.

/7
If that’s the case, then there aren’t a lot of choices here.

Poland, Britain and France will have to negotiate a deal with Putin to give them time to build up their deterrence posture.

If that’s the reality here, everyone needs to face it and understand it.

/8
None of this means that the US cannot do things to help its allies if they choose to fight.

As a non-combatant, America did a great deal to support Britain in the Falklands.

But Thatcher understood that the war was Britain’s to win or lose.

/9
We all need to get used to a new reality: The security of Europe has to be primarily the responsibility of European nations.

The era in which America could be counted on to be responsible for Europe’s security is over.

/10
What about Nato? What about the EU?

Notice that Germany wants no part in a European effort to balance Russia.

That’s your answer right there. The security architecture of Europe will have to be built some other way.

/end

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Yoram Hazony

Yoram Hazony Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @yhazony

Nov 23, 2021
We are watching an elite-led cultural revolution, being conducted *from above* by powerful institutions in the name of oppressed minorities.

1/
This was impossible in classical Marxism, because Marx and Engels regarded the capitalists and their allies—that is, the elites—as the oppressors.

2/
But after WWI, neo-Marxists devised a more flexible theory that allowed any powerful social structure—not just capitalism—to be regarded as the oppressor.

In this way, racial and gender oppression came to be at least as important as oppression on the basis of economic class.

3/
Read 11 tweets
Nov 22, 2021
Andrew, I’m surprised at this. Burke is famous for breaking with the Whig party over the French Revolution—and allying himself with the Tories.

Throughout he claimed loyalty to the “Old Whigs” (traditionalist conservatives) and rejected the “New Whigs” (today’s liberals).

/1
What did Burke and the Old Whigs believe? They defended tradition, the established church, monarchy, and aristocracy—against liberals (New Whigs) like Richard Price, Charles James Fox, Priestly, Paine and Jefferson, who favored reason, equality and religious disestablishment.

/2
Old Whigs did uphold the rights of Parliament against what they saw as the excessive claims of the king. Their heroes were common lawyers such as Fortescue, Coke, Selden, and Hale, who supported the tradition of parliamentary rights and a balance between king and parliament.

/3
Read 7 tweets
Oct 31, 2021
No. Nationalism is derived from biblical political theology. It is based on the Scriptural belief that humans beings and their institutions are diverse and see the world from divergent perspectives.

/1
For this reason, every community and nation must be responsible for its own path to God.

There is no such thing as a human institution that is competent to dictate political doctrine to all mankind—or one that can do so without becoming a tyranny.

/2
The “ideal” in Scripture is not world government. It is localism.

/3
Read 7 tweets
Oct 20, 2021
This is a surprisingly well-researched and balanced NYT essay on the growing rebellion against liberalism among American and European conservatives.

/1
The biggest problem with this analysis is that it tends to see a revived (“post-liberal”) conservatism as a basically Catholic phenomenon.

/2
Every connection with Catholicism is spelled out. But when Jews such as @oren_cass and @josh_hammer are discussed as leading (“post-liberal) conservative figures, somehow the fact that they are Jews doesn’t come up.

/3
Read 9 tweets
Aug 27, 2021
The "spirit" is something real in all human beings--what the Bible calls "ruah" and Plato calls "thymos."

It's what allows us to be angry and sad, to want things and to strive for truth and to be loyal and connected to our family and nation and to stand in awe before God.

/1
But it means little to "be spiritual." Human beings are all, by nature, "spiritual."

/2
The question is what we do with this spirit that is inside us:

Do we use it to accomplish important and good things, or evil? Do we use it puff ourselves full of vanity, or to reach beyond ourselves and become part of a larger family, congregation, and nation?

/3
Read 19 tweets
Aug 24, 2021
Here's a longer, rephrased version of what I said before:

Birth rates are collapsing throughout the America and Europe. The numbers are well below replacement almost everywhere.

The reason: Liberalism (or individualism) of course.

/1


nytimes.com/2021/06/16/us/…
It is liberalism (or individualism) that focuses everyone's attention on what *you* feel like doing. On what would be fun for *you*.

It is liberalism that turns us away from broader commitments.

/2
Contrary to what many people on Twitter seem to think, this liberal way of looking at things does *not* lead to a lot of children being born.

It leads to collapsing birthrates, well below replacement, almost everywhere.

/3
Read 10 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

:(