An Essay Point.

Around 2040, assuming people are still required to write essays (when I say 'write', I suppose I should say, 'compose') for whatever educational certificate that then operates, they will learn to regurgitate the small but significant fact that US troops, having been present in Europe in large numbers for 60 years, were drastically cut by President Bush jnr in 2004.

There are lots of consequences this might lead to.

It might accelerate the progress towards a European army, diminishing the status of national armies within Europe (almost a certainty, unfortunately).

It might increase the priority given to defence in European spending (unlikely, but an interesting possibility).

It might provoke some country or organisation to test European military resolve (this prospect is both frightening and, I'm a bit ashamed to say, exhilarating).

I don't want a European army, but I'd support Bush's move for several reasons.

One is that I think America should do what is best for itself, for a change. Only then will Europeans stop moaning about the US being selfish.

Secondly, if Europe wants to be 'fortress Europe', preserving its wealth through protectionism, then it had better get some soldiery to man the fort (at least to scare off extortioners). This will be very good for those who think we can be protectionist without a cost (as I believe many Europeans do).

Thirdly, I think this way we in Britain and people elsewhere in Europe will be confonted with the reality of pooled sovereignty, as we face a stark choice to donate our armed forces to the EU or to develop their compatibility and strength to complement the US army.

Mark Steyn has a trademark article expressing his satisfaction at the move. Highly recommended.

Stephen Pollard attacks the double standards of the Euro-Left in addressing military intervention.

Dr Richard North has some concrete observations about the US announcement. His message to our own politicians? Get real.