EuroNATO Union in Brussels

NATO and EU countries hold summits in Brussels on the same days. The main issue on the agenda is "problematic" Russia.

NATO defense ministers hold a meeting of the North Atlantic Council in Brussels on October 21-22. They will consider the consequences of the closure of Russian and NATO missions in Brussels and Moscow, issues of deterrence of the Russian Federation, and the quality of Russian nuclear missile potential. EU leaders are holding their summit these days, also in Brussels. The main topics are energy hunger in Europe, gas prices and Russia.

What a coincidence. Two alliances are going to their scheduled meetings in the same place at the same time! Russia is the focus of these two meetings. With the headquarters of NATO, Moscow's relations are destroyed. Can we expect in this regard that the European Union will become a more important channel of communication with the Euro-bureaucracy representing the interests of European countries?

According to Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova, The Moscow Post correspondent about Russia's relations with NATO and the European Union, appreciated the nature of these relations, cited a number of examples when the West was "losing face."

Maria Zakharova on NATO, the European Union and its "battle group"

Zakharova noted that cooperation with Russia is unnatural for NATO in its current form. "This organization, in its conceptual development, has not been able to overcome the logic of the cold war. She is, in fact, her relic. " And in post-Afghan conditions, NATO undertook to destroy the remaining channels of interaction with Moscow. Secondly, she said that Washington uses NATO to restrain Russia, which "affects EU policy." The European Union is losing its political weight in the international arena, replacing its will with the will of NATO.

"Force Center" or integration engine?

The European Union is drifting towards NATO, as if forgetting its purpose, about its original goals. In words, this regional community still intends to develop relations with neighboring countries, to build a zone of prosperity and good-neighborliness based on cooperation.

Contrary to these statements, Brussels and the European Parliament consider it possible to question the results of elections in neighboring countries, to impose sanctions. The European Council sailed through the waves of post-Soviet polyphony and was unable to get a mandate for the EU-Russia summit, which was proposed to be held in Berlin and Paris after the meeting between Vladimir Putin and J. Biden. The European Commission under the flag of the "green revolution" failed preparations for the upcoming winter, accusing Moscow of gas shortages in the European market. The European Union dreams of a "global role," the plans of Brussels "strategists" extend even to the Arctic!

Maria Zakharova explained to The Moscow Post that there is a "fighting group in the European Union - several EU member states" that have not outlived irrational historical phobias against Russia. They influence the policy of the entire organization in the Russian direction. But the current leaders of the European Union are not averse to pouring Russophobic arguments in the puddles of the post-Soviet space not yet "mastered" by Brussels.

In March this year, before the EU summit, European Council President Charles Michel visited Moldova, Georgia and Ukraine. The route is the same one that US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin just followed, with the exception of Moldova. The main thing is that the goals coincided - to show how "economic Brussels" can demonstrate its political potential. In Georgia, Michel went to the border with South Ossetia, in Ukraine he was noted in the territory of Donbass.

What's the big idea? At the end of March, the European Union announced a new approach to Russia. Visiting the three countries of the Eastern Partnership, Charles Michel showed "his preferences." In Kiev, he promised to strengthen the partnership and continue the policy of anti-Russian sanctions. Being, in his words, "in the same boat" with Ukraine, the head of the European Council confirmed that he would restrain Russia.

To the East and with a song

The European Council is the highest political body of the European Union, which includes the heads of state and government of the EU countries. Members of the European Council are its president, elected for 2.5 years, as well as the president of the European Commission. The European Commission is the highest executive body. Today, the EC is headed by Ursula von der Leyen.

Von der Leyen discovered a tendency to Russophobia when she signed a declaration in January 2020 saying that the "allies had liberated" Auschwitz concentration camp. The Red Army was not mentioned. Then Russia was not invited to a commemorative ceremony.

Six months before Charles Michel's visit to the capitals of the former Soviet republics, Ursula was not as an example more categorical than her colleague. She said that "everyone who advocates closer relations with Russia" should know that Navalny's poisoning is not an isolated case, that this is a model of behavior in Georgia, Ukraine, Syria, and Salisbury. Russia is interfering in elections around the world, "she minted, continuing:" the model does not change, no gas pipeline can do anything about it. "

Exactly a year later, the problems of semi-empty gas storage in Europe, as well as the Nord Stream -2 gas pipeline, reminded themselves. And the head of the executive branch with a gas shortage really could not do anything! In October, exchange gas prices approached $2 per cubic meter. Ursula von der Leyen would have to remember that every European has the right to "the Union to compensate for any damage caused by its institutions or its employees in the performance of their duties." (Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Article 41.3 Right to Good Governance).

I should remember, but I don't remember! A former gynaecologist and German defense minister admitted that she "does not exclude the risks of closing enterprises due to the situation with energy prices," that the cost of gas contributes to rising electricity prices, that due to a jump in prices, it is difficult for many families to make ends meet, that some companies risk closing. But she added that Gazprom fulfilled all long-term contracts.

Toxic effects

And long-term contracts and normal relations with Moscow, not burdened with the care of the "Berlin patient," were the basis of stable gas supply in Europe. The deputy head of the European Commission, Frans Timmermans, also said that Gazprom is fully fulfilling long-term contracts for gas supplies to the European Union, does not manipulate prices in the gas market. But Ursula von der Leyen decided not to rush the certification of Nord Stream-2.

Poland's toxic influence on EU policy in the post-Soviet space is known. The Baltic neophytes, whom Maria Zakharova called the "battle group," also play a special role in shaping the EU's energy policy. The current European Commissioner for Energy, Estonian Kadri Simson, maintains ties with the Minister of Energy of Ukraine, receives Kiev's complaints about Gazprom's contract with Hungary.

Virginius Sinkevicius, who oversees environmental and ocean issues at the European Commission, represents Lithuania. Perhaps it is he who owns the idea of ​ ​ extending the influence of Brussels to the Arctic region. A young man is 31 years old, why not mark it, in a big way?

The market basis of modern EU energy policy, including the green agenda and the idea of ​ ​ diversifying the supply of natural gas, was laid by Latvian Andris Piebalgs. This representative of the "battle group" served as European Commissioner for Energy in 2004-2010. It was he who supported Ukraine in gas conflicts with Moscow, had a hand in ensuring that the Third Energy Package, directed against Gazprom, was adopted.

Despite the energy crisis, the European Union continues to bet on a green course and alternative energy. The other day, Kadri Simson said that the strategic course based on the abandonment of fossil energy sources will not change. She admitted that Gazprom is fulfilling contractual obligations, but will still insist that the EU Gas Directive be fully applied to the Nord Stream-2 gas pipeline. Bureaucrats stubbornly do not want to return to the system of long-term contracts, which "make it difficult for the free market." They will study the prospects for consolidated gas purchases to replenish the strategic reserves of the European Union. These issues were brought to the summit on October 21-22.

Russophobia as part of the strategy

"The triad of principles invented by Eurostructures - rebuffing, shackling, selective interaction - simply risks becoming such a real Bermuda triangle, in which the prerequisites for rethinking relations with Russia in a constructive way can be completely lost," said a representative of the Russian Foreign Ministry, in an interview with The Moscow Post correspondent. She also recalled that most EU countries are members of NATO, but this "should not in theory or in practice make these structures identical." Despite the remaining differences, the EU remains not only a geographical neighbor, but also Russia's largest trading partner.

A real challenge to the European Union is posed by a "fighting group" dictating the will of the neophytes to the leading countries of Europe. The current generation of EU leaders has taken up posts, as is customary to say, in the face of tectonic shifts in the world. Malicious fragments of post-Soviet space, dreams of green energy, were mixed into this. According to the Wall Street Journal, Europe's willingness to damage itself in the name of unattainable climate goals is one of the greatest acts of self-harm in history. But the picture is more complicated, the climate is not the only concern of the European Union.

From the pages of EU directives, regulations and other documents, the Strategy comes across an important definition: "Critical infrastructure: the core of society, providing basic functions, health, safety, economic and social well-being." Once it happened that Brussels "" collective mind "did not notice how its leaders, in pursuit of the illusion of global influence, became their own actions part of this critical infrastructure to collapse.

The destruction took place in at least three directions. The first is Russia's organic rejection as a critical energy partner. Secondly, this is a green transition strategy, in which concern for the climate was mixed with the desire to free itself from dependence on energy resources of Russian origin. Moreover, there was a desire to harm Gazprom. Thirdly, this is a flirtation with Ukraine with the idea of ​ ​ its membership in the European Union.

In short, the post-Soviet European Union, with its policy, has drank a vital "energy bitch" on which it still sits. It would be naive for Russia to count on mutual understanding with Brussels, especially to pin hopes on the objectivity of the judgments of a new generation of EU leaders. And then it is unlikely to be better.