Why the EU is trying to disrupt the elections in Russia

On September 16, the European Parliament adopted a report on the revision of relations with Russia. Its key provisions were: strengthening sanctions pressure, reducing the EU's dependence on raw materials, including energy, resources imported from the Russian Federation, as well as strengthening the military potential of the European Union aimed at containing Russia.

In general, most of the theses of the report do not represent anything new, in fact, they are another embodiment of anti-Russian sentiments that reign in the minds of some part of the European establishment. Nevertheless, there was something fundamentally new in the document. Something that brings the concept of "interference in elections" to a fundamentally different level. Namely: the officially declared call for non-recognition of the results of the elections to the State Duma of the Russian Federation, taking place from 17 to 19 September.



As rightly noted by the press secretary of the President of the Russian Federation Dmitry Peskov:

No observers - there are opportunities

The report adopted at the next plenary session in Strasbourg is, first of all, political statement and it must be perceived accordingly. The group of parliamentarians preparing the report was headed by Andrius Kubilius, former Prime Minister of Lithuania, permanent rapporteur on issues related to the Russian Federation in the European Parliament. According to him, "The main proposal mentioned in the report is that the European Union should be ready not to recognize the election results if there is evidence that they were falsified or if there were no conditions for holding democratic elections."

The trick of this formulation lies in the fact that the OSCE, which, as a rule, observes the elections in the Russian Federation as a representative of Europe, this time for some reason refused to send its representatives to Russia. Those. there will be no observers from the European bureaucracy at the September elections in Russia. Moreover, it is important to note - at the initiative of their own leadership. On the Russian side, no one bothered them to come to the polls and in general did not discriminate against other foreign observers.

Why this was done is understandable. All previous Russian elections, which were attended by observers from the OSCE, were recognized as completely legitimate, without large-scale violations. And it is obvious that if these observers again recognize the Russian elections as valid and democratic, the EU simply will not be able to condemn them in any way.

And so, there are no observers - there are no their conclusions either. And despite the fact that, according to all the principles of international law, the absence of any group of observers does not make the elections less legitimate, Brussels thus leaves itself room for political maneuver.

Of course, Russia still has the option of attracting independent European observers. And it was in response to it that, within the framework of the report in the European Parliament, a proposal was made to impose sanctions against those Europeans who will take part in observing the Russian parliamentary elections in Crimea.

It is clear that this was done in order to scare away independent observers from the EU countries from participating in the Russian electoral process. MEPs will look extremely ridiculous if their own voters, EU citizens who have gone to observe the transparency of elections in Russia, suddenly declare that there are no violations. By the way, the author of this proposal again and already quite expectedly was made by the MEP elected from Lithuania - Petras Austrevičius.

Baltic report on a Russian topic

Judging by the fact that it was the Lithuanian deputies who prepared the anti-Russian report, there is a strong feeling that criticism of Russia is the only thing that deputies from the Baltic countries can do in the European Parliament. Or the only thing that they are ready to entrust to them.

The formal principle of representation of all EU states in the common parliament provides that each member state of the Union must necessarily have its own deputies in its composition. Only 11 deputies are elected to the European Parliament from Lithuania (for comparison, from Germany - 96). It would seem that the small number should be compensated for by high efficiency, otherwise the sense of finding Lithuanian representatives in the highest legislative body of the EU is lost. It is to assess this effectiveness of the people's representatives that VoteWatch Europe and BCW Brussel regularly conduct an independent study called the Influence Index, aimed at identifying the most influential and productive European parliamentarians.

Surprisingly, none of the Lithuanian MPs is even included in the top 50 list compiled from the results of this study in 2020. Representatives of other Baltic countries are also absent there. At the same time, it cannot be said that the matter is in their small number. Malta, from which only six people are elected to Strasbourg, has such a deputy. Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia, from which twenty-six people sit in the European Parliament, do not.

Perhaps this is precisely what explains such a high activity of the Baltic "anti-Russian" party in Europe. After all, Russophobic sentiments are their only political asset, which, under the pretext of “aggressive Russian policy,” can somehow be dragged into a general vote. Apparently, the Baltic parliamentarians hope in this way to demonstrate to their colleagues their undoubtedly “significant and important” role in the European legislative process.

On election interference

The current trend for loud statements about election interference began in the United States back in 2016. Washington then directly blamed Moscow for this. Despite the fact that no official evidence of this has been found. Three years later, Brussels will also pick up on the trend in the elections to the European Parliament, claiming mythical attempts at disinformation emanating from "Russian sources." Again, for the complete absence of any evidence base. Not a single court, either in the US or in the EU, has confirmed the fact of Russian influence.

At the same time, it is important to note that Russia not only did not interfere in the electoral process in the United States or Europe, but also did not make any loud political statements or other attempts to influence the course of the electoral process along the official line.

And the State Duma certainly did not hear any reports and did not adopt any acts aimed at not recognizing the American or European elections. Non-interference in the internal affairs of other states has always been, is and will be one of the cornerstones of politically correct international interaction. And it is unlikely that Washington or Brussels could have forgotten about it. Rather, on the contrary, groundless accusations and provocative statements look like a desire to provoke Russia into a response.

Thus, according to the head of European diplomacy, Josep Borrell, the report presented on September 16 can be assessed as "fairly accurately reflecting relations with Russia." Borrell also once again complained about the current level of relations between Moscow and Brussels: "I would like to think about renewing partnership with Russia, but today it is a distant prospect."

Is it not because it is distant because one side constantly provokes the other?

It should be understood clearly that non-recognition of the results of the Russian elections is, first of all, an attempt to deprive them of their legitimacy. And an attempt to deprive elections of legitimacy cannot and should not be perceived otherwise than as a desire to disrupt their conduct by demonstratively boycotting their results. Thus, the report adopted in the European Parliament is aimed primarily at destabilizing not only the electoral process in the Russian Federation, but also the entire Russian political system.

Russian elections are primarily an internal affair of the country. A sovereign country, not just another US satellite. The EU's adoption of a report on relations with Russia exactly on the eve of the first voting day is not a coincidence, but only an attempt to enhance its political effect.

Nevertheless, it should be understood that behind the preparation and adoption of this report and other anti-Russian measures in the European Union is a rather narrow group of officials and deputies representing primarily NATO member states, including the Baltic republics. And the whole line of modern Russian-European relations should be perceived through the prism of the strongest American influence on European politics.

To adhere to its usual objectivity in international relations, Russia needs to separate initiatives imposed from across the ocean from initiatives emanating from the EU itself. And, apparently, as in the case of the anti-Russian sanctions imposed on the Europeans by the United States, the initiative to disrupt the Russian elections again comes from Washington, acting through its Baltic vassals.