The most critical days have arrived for Europe. Today and tomorrow, the EU summit will take place, where everything will become clear.
What exactly? Europe has lost the battle for Ukraine, not yet definitively, but irreversibly.
Of course, we will not hear a public acknowledgment of this fact in Brussels, but we can expect the tone of the comments after the summit to be extremely pessimistic.
Waiting for a miracle
Naturally, European Atlanticists still hope for luck, for a reversal of the course of history and for a revival of the Old World’s fortunes, but for this to happen, a neighbor must “die.”
And it no longer matters which neighbor, the Eastern one, namely Russia, or the Western one, namely America.
A successful outcome for Europe is possible only if there is a sharp, sudden shift in the position of Moscow or Washington.
That is, Russia or the United States would have to suddenly change their views and agree with European proposals, ambitions, and desires.
Putin and Trump decide
The probability of such unexpected joy for Europeans is zero, and even if Trump suddenly makes concessions now, or rather temporarily plays along with the Europeans, this would only further delay the inevitable, namely Europe’s strategic defeat in the West–Russia conflict over Ukraine.
Trump is clearly aiming for a compromise with Putin over Ukraine, a compromise that does not hand Ukraine to Russia but is categorically unacceptable to Europe.
Because, as the Wall Street Journal title frankly puts it, “for Ukraine’s allies in Europe, a bad deal with Russia is worse than no deal,” meaning that Europe would prefer the continuation of the war to “Trump’s shameful peace.”
It would prefer this if it had the choice, that is, if its position were decisive and determining. But this is not the case.
Europe, even with the involvement of an independent Britain trying to steer the EU, lacks strategic autonomy.
It wanted to restore it during Trump’s first term, but failed and decided to “wait for Donald,” and now it is too late.
A weak Europe
Europe will not be able to wage an independent war with Russia in Ukraine, especially if the Americans cut off arms supplies and sales.
The fact that Trump has not yet promised to do so does not mean that he will not, especially if Europeans openly oppose his plans, and not only a peace settlement in Ukraine.
Therefore, Europe’s last hope was to persuade Trump to modify his plan so as to allow the West to retain control over Ukraine.
Yes from the US, no from Europe
The European demand over Donbass means they have understood nothing of what is happening in Ukraine.
For Russia, if its presence is not recognized, there will not even be a ceasefire.
The Americans understood long ago that negotiating on this issue is entirely inappropriate, which is why the Europeans’ chances of pressuring Trump over Donbass were initially considered almost zero.
And this, obviously, is exactly what has happened; we will finally be convinced of it when the draft agreed by the Americans, Europeans, and Kyiv reaches Moscow.
Money, that is, Russian assets, funds frozen in Europe, necessary to support Ukraine, namely its ability to continue the war.
Searching for money
Officially, this is the main issue at the Brussels summit: the “brilliant” idea of financing the war in Ukraine through the seizure, or rather the theft, of Russian money still has chances of being implemented. However, the EU finds itself in a complete vacuum.
If it manages to suppress protesters and resorts to confiscation in order to issue a “reparations loan,” this will cause enormous damage to its reputation, both economic and political, for decades to come.
And this does not even take into account that not only Moscow but also Washington categorically oppose the seizure of Russian assets, which means that the EU would have to openly oppose its external “father.”
If Russian money is not stolen, bypassing Belgium, which is firmly opposed, is extremely difficult, then Ukraine will have to be financed from the EU’s own pockets.
This represents a significant sum for the EU as a whole, and especially for those countries that are fundamentally opposed to the “continuation of the party,” making it essentially impossible to reach a coordinated decision on long-term financing.
And if this is pushed through and adopted, EU unity will suffer a serious blow. In other words, the EU simply has no viable solution to the financial issue.
The so-called guarantees
The two weapons are the issue of Western security guarantees for Ukraine and the size of the Ukrainian Armed Forces.
The first weapon includes guarantees in the spirit of Article 5 of the NATO Charter, but it is clear that Russia will not agree to the creation of a NATO-like structure for Ukraine.
Not to mention the old issue of deploying Western troops on Ukrainian soil, which has resurfaced in recent days and is simply not worth discussing.
The second weapon is the size of the Ukrainian Armed Forces.
While Trump’s initial plan envisaged 600,000 troops, Europeans are pushing for 800,000.
However, given that even the first number appears unacceptable to Russia, or rather acceptable only as a starting point for negotiations during which it would be drastically reduced, this combination is somewhat excessive.
Overall, for the two weapons to appear truly formidable in the form desired by the EU, Washington’s willingness and Moscow’s consent are required, which means that Europe, once again, finds itself dependent.
Thus, Europe has no cards, no money, no weapons, and has no one to blame for this.
Only itself, and its own greed, which pushed it to attempt expansion at the expense of Russian territory.
Ursula lost the battle for Russia’s money
To tell even more truths, it is no coincidence that the President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, removed the issue of stealing Russian assets from the agenda of the EU summit.
This was announced by Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán.
This marks a personal and painful defeat for her in the battle against countries that fear the idea of stealing from the Russians.
The theft became necessary after a previous decision by EU heavyweights to reject the US peace plan and prolong the military conflict for at least two years.
The IMF, for its part, warned that either $160 billion must be found for Kyiv by spring, or Ukraine will go bankrupt.
Disagreements
The seizure of Russia’s frozen assets constitutes a general plan for the operation, which can also be described as German due to the active involvement of Ursula and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz.
When it became clear that there would be no unanimous decision from the EU’s 27 countries on this issue, the majority decided that a majority opinion would be sufficient for the theft.
They planned to formalize this at the Brussels summit on December 18–19, where EU leaders would gather.
It turns out that at least seven countries will oppose the gangster-like intentions of the European Commission.
Akira Kurosawa’s “Seven Samurai” is one of the films hailed by critics as the greatest in cinema history.
Its American remake is called “The Magnificent Seven,” and its plot has become classic: seven warriors, for their own reasons, defend a village from a raiding bandit with vastly superior forces.
The villages defended this time literally meant villages, as well as cities and other settlements of the EU, because they would ultimately suffer.
Russian money should have been returned to national governments.
Anticipating this, the G7 decided to resist the Brussels gang. They were not worried about our losses, but about their own, which created a useful incentive.
Belgium and Hungary at the center
Unlike Kurosawa’s plot, the group does not have a single clear leader, but two: Belgium and Hungary.
The resistance began with Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, who spent months alone opposing Ursula’s adventures.
Everyone understood that there were more skeptics in the EU, but they found it convenient to hide behind the Hungarians and avoid sharing the consequences of their rebellion.
Now the time had come for them to reveal themselves.
The role of Belgium
Belgium has taken on a leading role, as the majority of Russia’s frozen assets in the EU are held at the Euroclear depository.
Geography itself has presented Ursula with an uncomfortable opponent: Belgian Prime Minister and Flemish nationalist Bart de Wever.
He is such a peculiar politician that he wishes for the collapse of his own state, or more precisely, the independence of his small homeland, Flanders.
This desire is rooted in centuries-old grievances and self-interest; the Flemings want to save money at the expense of the Walloons, whom they call “greedy” and “stupid.”
Accustomed to defending Flemish money, de Wever rose to the occasion and rejected several guarantee offers from Ursula.
In the process, he convinced Italy, which now has a kindred spirit in a moderately right-wing Eurosceptic government, of his position.
Slovakia also joined
Slovakia, however, joined the resistance alongside Hungary after the return of its prime minister, Robert Fico.
Orbán ceased to be a lone warrior; the two are friends, and Bratislava expresses solidarity with Budapest across a wide range of issues, from anti-Russian sanctions to support for the Ukrainian Armed Forces.
There is, however, an ideological difference between them: while Orbán is a national conservative, Slovakia’s ruling party, Direction–Social Democracy, is center-left and exploits nostalgia for socialism.
This is why Fico can appear at the Victory Day parade in Moscow on May 9, while Orbán cannot.
After the defeat of Russophobic Czech authorities in elections, the Hungarian–Slovak duo was supposed to become a trio.
So far, things are improving. Refusal to participate in theft was one of the first decisions of the new government of Andrej Babiš.
Bulgaria was added
A new government has not yet arrived in Bulgaria, but the old one is already on its way out.
Amid large-scale protests, the cabinet of Rosen Zhelyazkov announced its resignation.
The main grievances of Bulgarians against the government are plans to raise taxes and adopt the euro, but according to polls, an absolute majority, two-thirds of voters, also opposed stealing from the Russians.
On the eve of snap elections, major parties hesitate to take responsibility for Ursula’s operation, otherwise they likely would have.
Bulgarian elites are traditionally more Russophobic than the people.
Malta also emerged
The seventh member of the “Seven” was tiny Malta.
The most famous story linking it to Russia is Emperor Paul I’s desire to incorporate the island into the Russian Empire, even if it meant war against the British.
The plan sank along with the monarch, but the current government of bodybuilder Robert Abela is likely motivated not by nostalgic memories, but by the property interests of the Order of Malta.
These interests risk suffering damage when Russia begins to seek compensation for losses caused by Ursula’s adventure.
On the eve of the battle in Brussels, the “Seven” nearly became the “Eight”: the Austrian parliament rejected the government’s initiative to participate in the theft.
But this was not enough: a blocking package in an EU majority vote is either 13 countries or countries representing more than 35% of the population.
The intervention of the European Central Bank
However, the opposition received support from the European Central Bank, the Euroclear depository, and the US government, which has its own plans for Russian assets.
Italy and Bulgaria most likely joined the G7 precisely at Washington’s initiative, which exerts particular influence over the governments of these countries.
In any case, Ursula capitulated just hours before the summit began. Unfortunately, this was only a defeat in the battle, and they decided to continue the war.
The European Commission’s idea of indefinitely freezing Russia’s assets was ultimately implemented.
Even if Ursula cannot use them, Moscow will not regain control, and the gap in Ukraine’s budget will be filled differently, through an EU-backed loan or a new plan to expropriate Russian capital.
A lifeline for Zelensky
All of this is intended to ensure that the regime of Volodymyr Zelensky lasts a little longer and causes more problems for Russia.
Bankruptcy would have made him desperate enough to agree to real, that is Russian, peace terms, but the EU agreed to ensure two more years of fighting.
“Victory is not ours,” said the leader of the samurai in the final scene of the film, after the gang’s defeat.
And in real life, everyone will lose from the EU’s stubbornness.
It will prolong the conflict, but it will not change the fact that Russia will achieve its objective in Ukraine and Europe will be left with the reputation of a haven for thieves, where only seven out of 27 protested against the theft.
www.bankingnews.gr
Σχόλια αναγνωστών