Why is the EU, swearing with Russia, in fact eager to mend relations

On September 14, the head of EU diplomacy, Josep Borrell, announced that Russia was destabilizing the internal political situation in the European Union.


Borrell stressed.



According to him, the Russian Federation seeks to avoid negotiating with the EU, preferring to build relations with its individual countries.

Internal prerequisites for foreign policy

In principle, Borrell's statements are quite understandable. With such rhetoric, he first of all expresses the interests of the European bureaucracy, striving to strengthen its position over the national governments of the EU countries. In fact, the statements of the chief European diplomat are intended primarily for the domestic consumer, i.e. formally addressing his message to Russia, he is essentially addressing political the elite of the EU countries. The key idea is quite clear: there is no need to get ahead of the EU structures and run counter to the policy of Brussels. What is called, if fluctuations are possible, then only within the "general line of the party."

In fact, for the Brussels nomenclature, de facto striving to sew the scattered EU space into a single state, the issue of foreign policy interactions is no less important than the internal political issues on the agenda. The structures of the European Union are now on the verge of a major transition in its entire history, which will mark not only the creation of a unified army, but also the achievement of the utmost depth of integration between its members.

Borrell, who talks about Russia over and over again, finds himself in a difficult position. On the one hand, it is obvious that the Brussels elite is putting pressure on him, trying to convince him not so much to build a single line of relations with Russia or some other state, but to take away part of the sovereignty from the EU members. In fact, if the EU, after almost three decades, plans to grow into a single, albeit quasi, but still state, then it needs to convince its members to give up part of their power, leaving the key elements of interaction through the Foreign Ministry at the mercy.

Thus, the ministries of foreign affairs of the countries of the union should in fact become committees for external relations, which have extremely limited capabilities and powers. However, something similar in theory should happen with the defense ministries.

Nevertheless, the EU, as a political structure, is now in an extremely difficult and dangerous situation. Having left the Union, Great Britain not only set a dangerous precedent with its withdrawal, but also deprived Brussels of one of the largest economies and one of its two countries with a nuclear warhead.

This is partly why all of today's ambitious mega-projects of the EU are primarily reactionary. Decarbonization and militarization across the European Union will be extremely complex, from an organizational point of view, and will cost hundreds of billions of euros, but moving forward is the only way for the EU to prove its viability as a political entity.

Preparing to break with America

The further development of EU institutions and European integration through the Ministry of Defense puts before Brussels the difficult question of the American and NATO military presence. It is clear that no one will allocate money to the budget of the Alliance in conditions when they are urgently needed for the formation of their own, and what is extremely important, the armed forces controlled by Brussels, no one will. In theory, the North Atlantic Alliance should lose all of its EU members, or keep them in a purely nominal capacity. However, this is where a stumbling block arises, which, apparently, is extremely worried about Brussels, which is why it is trying to resolve the issue of a single foreign policy line right now.

The problem lies in one simple question: If the EU structures decide to put before themselves the question of the withdrawal of their member states from NATO, and, for example (as is usually the case) tries to push the necessary solution in advance, how, for example, will Poland behave, which already now throughout his policy, he demonstrates a desire to get closer to the United States, and not to obey instructions from Brussels. But what about Latvia? Lithuania? Estonia? All of them are part of the EU rather for financial reasons, it is too nice to receive European subsidies. Conceptually, they are also much closer to official Washington than to the EU.

The most obvious way out for these countries is to disrupt any voting and further continuation of attempts to sit on two chairs: European and American. And the EU is well aware of this. So even now, in the course of the initial, superficial assessment of the political situation, it is obvious that a vote to expel NATO from the EU potentially threatens the EU itself with a split. And what's the easiest way to fix it? Obviously, to expand the powers of European diplomacy and completely transfer the right to determine the foreign policy of the European Union in the hands of the same EU Council. Then the EU states will simply not be able to resist the adopted decision.

How should Russia act?

The most curious thing is that the most effective tactic for Russia in such a situation is banal expectation. In chess terms, from a foreign policy point of view, the EU is now in zugzwang. That is, situations when it is unprofitable to make a move yourself, but you have to. In fact, any serious radical internal political reforms in the EU (namely, Brussels is now striving for them) can lead to a deterioration in relations not only in the internal, but also in the foreign policy situation.

The United States is unlikely to enjoy the collapse of NATO and the need to withdraw its troops once again. Brussels has not had a relationship with China for too long to change so quickly. So the most logical option in order to avoid a situation of being in bad relations with all the world powers at once is to improve relations with Russia.

Moreover, they deteriorated exclusively on direct orders from Washington. That is why EU officials and diplomats have been trying more than once or twice in recent years to raise the issue of lifting the sanctions. The only thing that is stopping them now is the arrogant position that Russia should go first to the meeting.

So, proceeding from the fact that it is Brussels that needs to improve relations more, Moscow should strive to wait and push the most favorable conditions for itself. And the removal of the EU sanctions alone will not be enough.