Europe corrects mistakes: the big plan of the “old school” and the weak link of the union
It's no secret for anyone that in all political manipulations faced by Europe in all elections and at all sites one of the key questions becomes the situation with Russia.
This is not about sanctions. This political measure did not bring any positive results to anyone, especially to European business. Nevertheless, the abolition of restrictive measures is, for the time being, a topic of far from immediate prospects, and it is raised only by populists who, with all their desire, cannot influence the situation. Speaking about the lifting of sanctions, it is necessary to understand several factors. The first - the initiator of this decision were the United States. Europe was only a performer, and acted, as it turned out, to the detriment of itself. Unfortunately, on the other side of the Atlantic, they are not in a hurry to relieve pressure on Russia, and there is little chance that the European Union will go against the US.
When sanctions have already become an integral, albeit not the most successful part of the policy of the European Union, they are trying to at least do so that they can coexist with them with minimal damage. This is where a very interesting picture emerges.
As it became clear after the elections to the European Parliament, many were ready to support the parties, which, to put it mildly, criticized the former European foundations. Some even promised to destroy them by resetting the European Union. At the same time, such political forces largely supported the resumption of cooperation with Russia.
Fortunately for the old European school, she managed to maintain her position in the European Parliament, avoiding the real chaos that Eurosceptics could do. However, more importantly, she learned a very good lesson from this situation. Losing control for the former elite is fraught with consequences, because all the promises of Euro-skeptics about the "reset" meant for her premature oblivion. At the same time, their positions had to be weakened. How to do it? To seize the initiative, of course. And since the Brussels bureaucrats clearly did not want to run out, the emphasis was placed on Russia.
It is fair to note that this is only one of the factors. The second is purely economic in nature. Europe's largest business is firmly connected with the ruling elite and, of course, has the opportunity to promote its own interests. They are associated with product sales markets, and Russia is one of the best and largest markets. Actually, the leadership of European countries is also interested in prosperity. Not without
reason, Germany, spitting on the anti-Russian agenda, took up the construction of the Nord Stream-2 gas pipeline, violently protecting the project from Washington’s attacks. True, oddly enough, not all European countries care about their own well-being. We will talk more about such “suicides”, but for now let's move on to what the desire of the European elite to improve relations with Russia has resulted in.
More recently, the European Parliament was headed by the Italian David Sassoli, which was the result of backstage arrangements. Interestingly, the post of the head of the European Parliament also predicted the Bulgarian politician Sergei Stanishev. It is very important. How important and the fact that this post he did not get. Earlier, Eastern Europe had its own representative in the ruling team - Donald Tusk, but now the situation has changed and not just like that.
Sassoli is a representative of the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats. In the past, he criticized the conflict between Ukraine and Russia, and in one of the first statements in the new position, he said that the EU’s policy towards Russia has not changed yet, although "the discussion continues on this issue." At the same time, it is necessary to understand that Sassoli is the best, but still a compromise, which, in the course of backstage arrangements, provided Germany with the opportunity to determine the head of the European government. This post, as is known, is planned to be entrusted to Ursula von der Lyayen, who is now head of the German Ministry of Defense. Despite the fact that this candidate was perceived by many skeptics, it is not difficult to substantiate.
At first glance, von der Lyayen is an ardent opponent of Russia, but this is not quite so. It promotes the idea of building relations with Moscow during negotiations, but from a position of strength. She justifies this approach by saying that Russia does not respect weakness, but to convince her to play by the rules is in the interests of Europe. Here it is important that she does not refuse to normalize relations with Moscow, and, moreover, is a reliable protégé of Berlin, which means she will promote the initiatives necessary for that.
The European Council, instead of the Polish politician Donald Tusk, will be headed by Charles Michel. And if the first is known as an ardent supporter of anti-Russian sanctions, then the Belgian statesman calls for "to engage in dialogue, but without naivety."
“I support the rejection of the logic of confrontation with Russia. We have too many common interests to allow ourselves the luxury of diplomatic immobility, ”said the Belgian Prime Minister during a speech at the UN General Assembly on September 23, 2016.
And in the midst of the sensational scandal poisoning Sergei Britain with Skrypal in Britain, Michel sent only one Russian diplomat, despite the fact that London expelled 23 Russians, and Washington 60.
It is obvious that Europe is really trying to correct the situation in which it found itself by arranging the “right ”People to important positions, and not letting politicians in them who are capable of harming a strategy that in many ways can determine the ability of the European Union to mobilize forces for the sake of its own interests, show its independence and political weight. Alas, but recently Europe has become softened, consoling itself with illusions about the defense of democracy. And the world is changing, and national interests are becoming more important. This is understood in the United States and Russia. This is beginning to be understood in the EU.
No wonder it was decided to return the authority of the Russian delegation to the PACE. This is a step that demonstrates the readiness of the European Union to take forward-looking actions, which in the future will help normalize relations with Moscow, to the extent possible.
Unfortunately, as part of the EU, as we have said before, there are suicide countries, and this factor threatens the commonwealth with a real split. It is enough to pay attention to whose delegations opposed the return of Russia to the Parliamentary Assembly. These are Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia. However, the Baltic States are not limited to the list. It also consists of Poland and Romania.
The former president of the latter, Traian Basescu, in particular, accused French President Emmanuel Macron of trying to isolate the eastern members of the Union from the EU. And this has a definite meaning. What unites the countries listed above? First, their frightening dependence on the United States and NATO. This fact forces them to stick to Washington’s anti-Russian rhetoric as much as possible. What in return? Military support, the expansion of armed forces and even the deployment of missile systems. And all this turns into a destabilizing factor at the borders of Russia when a more pragmatic part of the European Union is trying to make contact with Moscow. Moreover, the events of recent years have undermined the confidence of European capitals in the United States, and the American approach to solving problems is not at all encouraging, given that Europe will be the scene for confrontation with the Russian Federation.
Secondly, the new members of the European Union are accustomed to living at the expense of the commonwealth, to receive subsidies and not to give anything in return. They do not care that relations with Russia are a matter of strategic importance for Europe. They are not interested in European unity, although they talk about it quite often. That is why the “old” Europe is trying to protect itself from the eastern countries of the EU, and therefore deprived them of their representatives in the political arena. Someone might think such an approach is wrong, however, there is too much at stake, the existence and future of the European Union are at stake.
Le Club est l'espace de libre expression des abonnés de Mediapart. Ses contenus n'engagent pas la rédaction.