Trump’s realignment with the Russian leader has put a fearful Europe on red alert about its own security, amid fears that America could withdraw completely from Nato, even as British prime minister Keir Starmer revealed 30 countries are ready to join the “coalition of the willing”. 

Following a virtual summit last Saturday aimed at providing increased military support for Ukraine in case the US pulls the plug completely, Starmer said there could be “significant numbers” of countries providing troops and materiel, with a larger group “contributing in other ways”.

Since the end of the Second World War, Europe has relied politically, economically, and militarily on America; its security almost completely dependent on Washington’s contributions. With a wilful and petulant president in the Oval Office, that support is no longer a given. Germany, Britain, and France — along with fellow Nato member Canada — now want to draw Europe together to face its own security responsibilities.  

The resolution of those nations backing Ukraine and, by association, Europe’s own security will be tested by a number of issues, such as the “broad nuclear umbrella” previously suggested by Emmanuel Macron and again on Monday by former Nato general secretary Anders Fogh Rasmussen.

That Europe is serious about defending itself will send a vigorous message to Washington and Moscow and perhaps temper any idea in the Oval Office or the Kremlin that they can simply carve Ukraine up between them. Those painting the “Europe is doomed” picture may well have to redraw their conclusion. It is entirely possible that Trump’s braggadocio and Putin’s belief in his own infallibility will forge a Europe that is capable of standing up to both of them.

Peaceful protest in Serbia

As hundreds of menacing black-clad men with black baseball hats and matching black backpacks gathered at Belgrade’s Pionirski Park — some said to be football hooligans, others supposedly members of Serbia’s notorious Red Berets special forces — opponents of the increasingly autocratic president, Aleksander Vucic, refused to be cowed.

Tens of thousands of them faced down these pro-government thugs — the government estimated a crowd of 107,000, while independent monitoring groups put it at 325,000 — and marched through the capital demanding official accountability, an end to corruption and authoritarianism.

A mix of students, farmers, academics, trade unionists, and many others resisted efforts by Vucic and his cohorts to stoke up tensions ahead of the weekend protest. 

He called it an “imported revolution” and suggested there would be an attempt to overthrow him by force. The protest was overwhelmingly peaceful.

Protests across Serbia have become a near daily occurrence since the November 1 collapse of a canopy at a train station in the city of Novi Sad which killed 15 people. 

Public outrage was fuelled by an attempt by government to cover up unsafe construction methods. Students have led the growing clamour for Vucic to stand down. 

They have frustrated official attempts to discredit their movement by refusing to elect a leadership and by shunning the opposition parties they claim are complicit in the atrophy of government and a widespread cynicism regarding the Serbian civil service.

For Vucic, their tactics have proven resolute and difficult to sunder and, if anything, are an excellent model in taking on a democratically elected but autocratic leader unwilling to listen to the collective voice of his people.

With Serbia’s prime minister, Milos Vucevic, having already fallen on his sword at the start of the year, the protests against Vucic have only intensified. Patching up a corrupt regime and unsubstantial anti corruption laws will get him only so far. The Serbian people have spoken and, it appears, they will continue to do so until either demonstrable change is effected or the government collapses.

What's your view on this issue?

You can tell us here

Swear by it 

Swearing may be “like a delicate spice: You can sprinkle it artfully to add just the right kick” as our columnist Bernard O’Shea suggested this week while reviewing his old standups, but it does have another benefit we often forget — increasing human tolerance of pain.

O’Shea was struck by his frequent swearing, but reminded himself (and us) that while a four-letter word is likely the most common utterance when you stub a toe or slam a door on your finger, researchers believe swearing is closely linked to hypoalgesia — the official name for a reduced sensitivity to pain. 

The study some years ago at Keele University in England established that cursing is “a drug-free, calorie-neutral, cost-free means of self-help”. 

The team also established, by means of an anaerobic power test on a bike, that swearing is linked to an improvement in participant strength but are now at a loss to understand exactly the psychological mechanism by which swearing triggers these effects.

Research is still ongoing, but there is a growing acceptance about the positivity to be gained shouting it loud — and the uglier the better. 

It certainly seems to put to bed the old assertion about not giving a curse.

Given daily developments in America, chances are many of us will be reaching for swear words on a regular basis.