Fighting Half-Blind Without U.S. Eyes
Imagine war without America's watchful space eyes
Decoding Geopolitics Podcast with Dominik Presl
Jul 25, 2026 · 32 min · 13 segments
➡️ Watch the full interview ad-free, join a community of geopolitics enthusiasts and gain access to exclusive content on PATREON: https://www.patreon.com/DecodingGeopolitics ➡️ Sign up to my free…
Dominik PreslHost
So you wrote this interesting, really interesting paper, as I was just saying before we started recording, um, that's basically an analysis of what it would look like if Europe had to fight against Russia, presumably, but if it had to fight completely without the US, and if it had to fight tonight as it stands right now, not a few years, uh, later down the line.

So can you maybe explain a bit more what it is, and what made you do this, and what, what is the purpose of this analysis that you made?
So it was-- the paper was born out of, uh, the time that I've spent, uh, in this position where I've listened to a large number of, of military officers, primarily NATO officers, uh, who often talk about, you know, how they exercise and prepare for operations, and always heavily relies upon a US backing.
Um, and then sometimes that takes a, a physical sense in terms of they rely on US capabilities.
Uh, it might be that they refer to US doctrine, which is often built on the back of US capabilities.
Uh, it's built on the back of a US command and control network, which, you know, has a lot of expertise over many years in running quite complex operations.
And someone asked the question, "But what was the intelligence and surveillance assets you were using to identify those targets, and what assets were you using to reach those targets?" And the answer was US.
Uh, and that struck me as being, given the times that we live in, uh, a little bit, uh, imprudent, and maybe a more cautious, uh, and responsible approach, uh, and not just from a theoretical perspective, which, you know, I understand the paper is, but, uh, as a military commander preparing for the most dangerous course of action should be prepared for some of the support not being available.
Um, and I know this is a rather severe test, i.e. no US support whatsoever, but we do plan, for example, in military operations not having communications.
Well, I think a, a prudent approach would be to plan if we had a, you know, none of that US support, so how would we fight then? And of course, that does become a, a theoretical exercise, but there are very real, um, practical and operational implications if you're to follow that through to its end state.


So I'm wondering if what you were trying to do here, um, if to an extent do you think that military planners in Europe are pl- planning or preparing for this eventuality as well? Because it would seem obvious on, on one hand that they do that in a similar way as you did.

But in reality, um, even though people are aware of the reality or the, the potential possibility of the US withdrawing from Europe, and the option of having to fight alone being a real possibility, I feel like on paper the, the that's not really an option because on paper all military planning is tied to NATO, no one is questioning US NATO membership.

So I imagine that even if European military planners might think it's a good idea to plan for this eventuality, I'm not sure how much of it is actually getting done.

So you wrote this interesting, really interesting paper, as I was just saying before we started recording, um, that's basically an analysis of what it would look like if Europe had to fight against Russia, presumably, but if it had to fight completely without the US, and if it had to fight tonight as it stands right now, not a few years, uh, later down the line.

So can you maybe explain a bit more what it is, and what made you do this, and what, what is the purpose of this analysis that you made?
So it was-- the paper was born out of, uh, the time that I've spent, uh, in this position where I've listened to a large number of, of military officers, primarily NATO officers, uh, who often talk about, you know, how they exercise and prepare for operations, and always heavily relies upon a US backing.
Um, and then sometimes that takes a, a physical sense in terms of they rely on US capabilities.
Uh, it might be that they refer to US doctrine, which is often built on the back of US capabilities.
Uh, it's built on the back of a US command and control network, which, you know, has a lot of expertise over many years in running quite complex operations.
And someone asked the question, "But what was the intelligence and surveillance assets you were using to identify those targets, and what assets were you using to reach those targets?" And the answer was US.
Uh, and that struck me as being, given the times that we live in, uh, a little bit, uh, imprudent, and maybe a more cautious, uh, and responsible approach, uh, and not just from a theoretical perspective, which, you know, I understand the paper is, but, uh, as a military commander preparing for the most dangerous course of action should be prepared for some of the support not being available.
Um, and I know this is a rather severe test, i.e. no US support whatsoever, but we do plan, for example, in military operations not having communications.
Well, I think a, a prudent approach would be to plan if we had a, you know, none of that US support, so how would we fight then? And of course, that does become a, a theoretical exercise, but there are very real, um, practical and operational implications if you're to follow that through to its end state.


So I'm wondering if what you were trying to do here, um, if to an extent do you think that military planners in Europe are pl- planning or preparing for this eventuality as well? Because it would seem obvious on, on one hand that they do that in a similar way as you did.

But in reality, um, even though people are aware of the reality or the, the potential possibility of the US withdrawing from Europe, and the option of having to fight alone being a real possibility, I feel like on paper the, the that's not really an option because on paper all military planning is tied to NATO, no one is questioning US NATO membership.

So I imagine that even if European military planners might think it's a good idea to plan for this eventuality, I'm not sure how much of it is actually getting done.
Every episode on Radar is fully transcribed, speaker-labeled, and rich with metadata. Here is a taste of this one. Try Radar for free to see the rest.
3 of 6
Fighting Half-Blind Without U.S. Eyes
Imagine war without America's watchful space eyes
Who Leads NATO If America Sits Out?
Leadership vacuum appears when America refuses active combat
The Exercise That Exposed Dependence
A training drill revealed Europe’s hidden reliance
+3 more clips · 8 min 22 sec of audio in all
7 of 25
The rest of this transcript — segmented and speaker-labeled, so you land on the exact moment something was said
All 6 clips — the highlight moments, each cut as its own audio, with a title and a speaker
All 13 segments — the transcript broken into labeled sections, every ad read marked
All 25 topics — jump to every other episode discussing the same subject
Every related episode — other shows Radar links to this one
No account is needed to search Radar.