(What If) The EU changes it's stance

[spikenigma]

'twas lunch at Chinese, and over the delicious special-fried-rice and sweet & sour chicken, the following discussion was had:



ok, so it's a sunny morning in August 2007. President Bush goes on the air at around 10:00am in an address to the nation, and gravely states that Iran (and Syria) have been found to be involved in "illegal" weapons grade Uranium production - and they will in 5 days be hit with (congress/senate backed) targeted air strikes.

The strikes will be conducted jointly by the US and Israel to take out their facilities, as diplomatic talks have failed to resolve the situation

UN protestations are of course ignored


then something strange happens in Europe:

* Prime Minister Brown (of the UK) conducts an impromptu press conference at the BBC and says Britain can morally have no part in the attack
* Shortly After, The Prime Minster and President of France jointly on air echo Prime Minster Brown's earlier sentiments
* The President, and Chancellor Merkel of Germany do the same

a few hours later President Hans-Gert Pöttering (president of the European Union parliament) issues a statement that all member states of the EU have been in talks with countries of the middle east and all EU member states (including the UK) are in complete agreement.

The EU will completely and categorically not be allowing any unprovoked aggression directed at Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Egypt or Jordan - and that a new 50 year treaty will be shortly drafted.

The statement then adds that 'any' unprovoked aggression (it doesn't name names) against those countries would illicit full economic sanctions and full military defense.

The European papers/news channels of course start going crazy and most polls come back with 78-89% of the populations in favour of the stance taken by the EU and any future action

British, French, German, Spanish and Italian ships (and rumoured submarines) are moved into the gulf from 'routine exercises' from around the area

Russia, China and Japan strangely say they will remain completely neutral in the standoff

what happens next? - a climb-down?, years of political wrangling?, US<->EU talks?, war?, economic war?, a cold war?, Britney’s career get's back on track?

* why would the EU put everything on the line this way? - shady oil deals?, the illuminati?, the pod people?, god talking to them? - who knows, so BTW - If your only response is "the scenario sux! - I r t3h smart for pointin' this out HURR!" - then kindly fuck right off out of the thread! Thankyou very much!

[Adrian Laguna]

Are you going to provide some links or do we just have to take your word for it?

[Melchior]

Are you going to provide some links or do we just have to take your word for it?

ok, so it's a sunny morning in August 2007

It hasn't actually happened.

[Vendetta]

The (WI) in the title is supposed to stand for What If, I presume.

Writing it out would have been useful.

Also, this might be better in Off Topic, as that's where hypothetical future histories usually end up.

[NecronLord]

Changes shall be made.

We Worship His Shadow.

[Prozac the Robert]

I can't see it going anywhere. But then I can't see it happening anyway.

My guess is that either:
a) the US backs down, or
b) the US launches the strike without getting close to any EU things. There is much wringing of hands on the EU side. The US becomes really really unpopular.

But it all depends on the pod people.

[Phantasee]

This sounds pretty goddamned lame on the EU's part. I mean, do they not like blowing shit up? And since when do those "tolerant" nations of Europe help out the A-Rabs? I mean, they've gone all intolerant on their own Muslim populations lately, and are likely to go further in the future.

I think it puts the US into a corner, and Dems win in 08, only to be tainted by a scandal involving a blue dress, which distracts the whole world while those nice big B-52s fly over there and create a Stone Age theme park.

[SVPD]

Israel handles the bombing of Syria. The US handles the bombing of Iran from the Arabian Sea, Afghanistan, Iraq, and CONUS with long-range bombers.

The EU figures out it can't really do shit militarily and it can't afford economic sanctions against the U.S.

Canada gets pissed off at the U.S. for starting more shit and at the EU for rocking the boat with Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan.

Britain ends up ditching the EU in order to get its soldiers out of Iraq and Afghanistan past the U.S. Navy

The rest of the E.U. eventually figures out that the U.S. is going to sink all the naval forces it has bottled up in the Gulf if they atempt to stop the flow of supplies to soldiers in Iraq, gives up and goes home, deciding it's easier and cheaper to keep protesting in the U.N. Quietly they decide it might not have been such a good idea to allow their militaries to become so impotent.

Worst-case scenario is the French get really nuts and engage in a long-range carrier battle between their nuclear carrier and one of ours, causing fairly serious losses to our forces, but getting their carrier sunk or at least very seriously damaged.

[Raesene]

As a minimum, NATO breaks apart, all US troops and installations have to leave Europe.
British/French submarines start to trail US SSBNs to show the disagreement is serious.

European defense spending will increase significantly for the next few years, a lot of equipment gets into Arab hands. Israel suffers a new wave of terror, having less security than before.

Trade between the EU and USA is reduced, probably more due to 'Don't buy 'Goods made in USA/EU'' campaigns than real export/import stops.
Oil will be paid for in €, not $ anymore.

But then President Gore wakes up, turns to his wife and says 'Honey, I had such a weird dream..."

[Big Phil]

This scenario is so idiotic and far-fetched, it's like some radical socialist's wet dream; enlightened Europe protecting the poor innocent Arabs from unprovoked American aggression

A six year old might find this scenario plausible; anyone else should look at this and ask what you're smoking.

[Lazarus]

SVPD said:

Britain ends up ditching the EU in order to get its soldiers out of Iraq and Afghanistan past the U.S. Navy

Why would we ditch the EU to do this? I don't understand what you mean, surely we would stay with them, and against the US?

Suspension of disbelief requires that the EU have reason to do this, and the balls to back it up, else it doesn't really work as a scenario.

Consequently, I doubt the US would go ahead with it. Israel might, with covert support from the US, but if they did they'd be attacked by EU units already present, so I'm not so sure.

Either way, EU troops would immediately be withdrawn, or at least redeployed away from US units in the Middle East. The former could be used as a sanction against the US.

I sincerely doubt this would go to any sort of engagement between the US and EU, BUT I expect it would change the political scene to a close US/Israel, and a more united EU. The EU constitution would most likely finally be passed, further uniting Europe.