By Rostislav Ishchenko
Translated by Ollie Richardson and Angelina Siard
cross posted with https://www.stalkerzone.org/rostislav-ishchenko-eu-2019-problem-survival
source: https://ukraina.ru/opinion/20190109/1022191926.html
The European Union enters 2019 with a mass of unresolved problems, in addition to being torn apart by the most severe contradictions…
The first and main problem is that the EU was created as one of the mechanisms of the US’ control over Western Europe. Without the American Marshall Plan, without opening American markets for European goods, without American troops on the European continent, without NATO, eventually, the European Union wouldn’t be possible.
When it is said that the EU was conceived, among other things, as a way of removing German-French contradictions, for the purpose of preventing future conflicts that led to the First and Second World Wars, it is the truth. But it must be kept in mind that the German-French unity was necessary and favourable exclusively for the US. Great Britain, on the contrary, during all its history fought to split Europe and to prevent a situation where one state or a union of states could dominate on the continent.
The US was separated from Europe not by a strait, but by an ocean. In addition, they were much stronger than Great Britain was at the peak of its power. A strong and united Europe was needed by the US as an ally in the fight against the USSR. This approach ensured trade preferences and military protection for Europe. I.e., the US allowed the EU to earn money on their market, shared out bonuses from it neocolonial policy, and in addition it also bore the main weight of the armed protection of the EU, exempting Europe from a considerable part of military expenses. In exchange, Europe was becoming a theatre of military operations of the nuclear Armageddon being prepared, allowing the US to remain once again on the sidelines. At least, that’s what Washington thought.
In the 21st century the situation started to slowly change, and in 2017, with the coming to power of Trump in the US, it changed at once and with drama. The US faced a deficit of resources, which at first was supposed to be filled at the expense of looting Russia and China. But when it became clear that this plan can’t be realised, the US cutting its expenditure on the EU became the only way of reducing its resource deficit. Moreover, by the beginning of the 2010’s Washington started to consider their European allies as a lawful trophy. Looting the EU could also temporarily and partially solve the American problem of a deficit of available resources.
In these circumstances, the renaissance of conservative forces challenging the power of globalists started in Europe. And since globalists leaned on the US and received support from Washington, conservatives, at least some of them, started to turn their heads towards Russia.
The erosion of the foundations of the European-American union, as well as the split of the European elites and the reorientation of some of them towards Russia, led to Washington losing (fully or partially) its mechanisms that allowed it to control the European Union. The danger of the EU switching to an economic, and then military-political, union with Russia actualised for the US the old British concept of a shattered Europe. Washington didn’t and doesn’t have the desire to give Moscow a mechanism for the management of Europe that is as effective as the European Union. In this regard the US tried to start the dismantlement of the EU.
Great Britain’s exit from the EU, unrest in France and Hungary, attempts to spread this disorder to Germany (so far unsuccessfully), Warsaw’s actualisation of Polish-German contradictions, in general – setting Eastern Europe against Western Europe (Polish-Baltic-Romanian bloc vs German-French bloc). Against this background the contradictions between the rich North and the poor South, which until recently were the main contradictions for the EU, temporarily faded into the background, but didn’t disappear anywhere and at any moment can flare up with a new force.
We can ascertain that intra-European contradictions are too strong, and centripetal forces don’t have a notable superiority over centrifugal forces. That’s why the sustainable and stable development of the EU is possible only in conditions where the concept of a united Europe and its implementing forces receive political support from a powerful external ally interested in the unity of Europe. Today only Russia can be such an ally, especially since Moscow sees the advantage of an alliance with the EU not in paying Europe for a self-destructive policy, but in achieving a cumulative effect from economic interaction.
Russia has extended a hand to the European Union for more than twenty years. However, traditions of Eurocentrism, political inertia, ideological tunnel vision, and also the initial absence of trust towards Russia’s ability to revive itself as a global power inhibited the turning of the EU towards cooperation with Russia. As a result, that moment when Europe could rather painlessly, without hurrying, and quietly carry out a strategic turn was ineptly missed by Euro-politicians and Euro-bureaucracy.
Nowadays the European Union is under threefold pressure. Firstly, this is the pressure of the people at large, who don’t like the inevitable decrease in the standard of living. They got used to considering themselves as the “salt of the earth” and are sure that they are owed high social standards by their birthright. Secondly, this is also the pressure of national states pulling in different directions.
Having lost the opportunity to ensure financing for the globalist policy at the US’ expense, Euro-bureaucracy started to be uninteresting for national governments. It does a lot of squealing, but it doesn’t have enough wool. Respectively, ethnic contradictions, which in the past were softened by the all-European policy, again come to the forefront, tearing “united Europe” apart. Thirdly, the US isn’t interested anymore in maintaining a high standard of living in the EU, closes its markets to them, and tries to kill off European industry as a competitor to their own one. Washington is also interested in redistributing the resources controlled by the EU in its own favour. And lastly, seeing the danger of the in-motion (although slow) drift of the EU towards Russia, the US isn’t interested in leaving for Moscow a united European Union, which can be put into order rather quickly. The policy of Washington over the past two years is designed to destroy the EU.
What happens next depends on the European Union. Its rescue lies in accelerating the reorientation towards political-economic cooperation with Russia. American pressure cannot penetrate a Russian-European bloc. Today this reorientation is most strongly slowed down by “Euro-Atlantic structures”, which have no place in the new European world, and these are the thousands of influential politicians and military men, as well as representatives of traditional globalist bureaucracy. People who built their career over 20-30 years on the unconditional submission of Europe to the interests of the US aren’t able to change their policy. This contradicts their interests, and in addition they passed through negative selection, and it means that the features of their intelligence simply don’t allow them to realise the danger threatening Europe.
The replacement of globalists with nationalists at the level of the national states picks up speed in Europe. Even the globalist Macron was forced to implement the ideas of conservative nationalists. But it isn’t clear yet if the replacement of the elite will have the time to take place and whether or not new politicians will manage to change the course of the European ship before it will be definitively broken on the rocks.
A lot of things will depend on European Parliament elections in 2019. If nationalists are able to receive a majority in the European Parliament and then force globalists out from the leading heights of the European Commission and other leading structures of the EU, then the European Union will have a chance. If the current state of affairs will remain unchanged, then most likely we will be forced to forget about a united Europe for a long time and start building a system of unions with certain states – in particular, with Germany.
Much thanks to Ollie and Angelina for these two articles by Ishchenko. Your work is invaluable!
In a nutshell, Ishchenko describes the dynamics within the EU from a perspective we in the West could not easily ingest.
It is far more than nationalism that is ongoing.
The vassals are struggling for liberty from the Hegemon.
Look back to 2013-2014 and view Ukraine as the natural, simple coupling mechanism of EU-to-Russia (and thus to Eurasia as it develops). Therefore, Ukraine had to be sent into chaos to break the connection, destory the mechanism.
To deprive Russia of Ukraine is one thing. Obvious. But to deny Russia to Ukraine and Europe is quite another thing of enormous importance and consequence.
So, the Russophobia of brittle Britain and all the lies and false flags from the UK.
So, the Sanctions Regime of the US. And the crazed Russophobia of the US Senate and Presidents and Presidential candidates.
Ishchenko illuminates what is the hybrid war’s insemination.
Even if the US is able to destroy the EU, I don’t see how this will save the US.
All the anglo-zionist empire is sick. The new world order has perverted all traditional values : family, honesty, professional concious and sexual behavior. The anglo-zionist empire including the US, the EU with UK, Canada, Australia, New-Zealand and Israel is in a state worse than the Augias’ stables. Nothing good can be expected from this empire before a tsunami clean the stables.
https://sputniknews.com/europe/201901091071339115-integrity-initiative-german-cluster/
Hence the II attention and intentions on promoting Germanic russophobia…
Mr. Ishchenko confirmed what I’ve been saying for a long time.
Just the conclusion is amiss – there is no hope for the EU, nationalists/anti-globalists in charge or not.
The nationalist-revival in Europe is being hijacked or maybe even led by the US (via Bannon, PCR with his
“poor-whitey” articles etc) to instigate inter-state and even intra-state (read civil war) conflict.
But…
Well deserved. No empathy at all.
I have been watching the events in the EU carefully and here are few things I have to say.
First of all, it seems that even those considered Eurosceptics what to keep the EU going the question is why? My answer is: they have been so brainwashed into thinking that if they leave EU their life will collapse.
Also there are more important problems not generally mentioned in the media and the most important issue is the Agenda 21 in the UN, as well the issue of face migration. Just this morning going through Greek media on the Youtube, I stumbled on some Italian news, which deal with this problem. Some of the videos go back to last Summer, but the video from the UN is just after the sneaky migration pact from Marocco.
So, I have collected some, which I was going to post in the caffe, but since the issue is EU I decided to put them here.
Extraordinary speech by Giorgia Meloni on UN Global Compact in Italian parliament (English subs)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ra-WY52i_Mc
Matteo Salvini’s immigration law is passed in Italian parliament, Decreto Salvini (English subs)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=utlwiFYGOms
Salvini – Europe’s Most Feared Man (English)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8OJPWnDZ5H8
Italian PM candidate Matteo Salvini explains George Soros’ Open Society Foundation activities (English Subs)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1jt9MLdg3JQ
Farage about Hungary (English):
“Hungary will not be a country of migrants” – Viktor Orban’s scathing address to European Parliament
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-8UwmpsWPUA
To finish, there are few European countries that refuse to accept this Migration farce funded by the people behind Soros.
Also just today I saw an article claiming, that Italy leaving EU will end the EU. I do not see Salvini going that far. I see him as pro EU, but with some changes.
Also, just this morning I read something about Germany’s economy slowing down, which is not surprising. Their economy is driven by car sales. Trump is pushing them back, and most Europeans can only afford overpriced used German cars.
Dear Anonius,
I’d like to give you some more elements about italian politics, so that you can better contextualize the speeches you’ve listened to.
First, about Giorgia Meloni: she happened to be the chief of a very little party – a party that nowadays collects basically remnants from other little-medium parties, now disappeared, which represented for relatively long time the political heritage of fascism, and which actually sold themselves to mr. Berlusconi and his band of robbers.
It’s an easy game for her now re-gaining political virginity by acting as anti-establishment. With berlusconians in decline, the only possibility she has is remaining in the opposition and stressing ideological issues over and over.
Even though some of her positions seem right (at least from my point of view), there’s no way she can keep them strong if not from her irrelevant opposition side.
Second, about Salvini. He is an over-talker, flooding media with all sort of low-level speech (the same level of his electors), most of which he just cannot politically honour: they’re mainly built for propaganda. His party (Lega) was originally (1990s) a northern-Italy party, protesting against Rome, against southern-Italy as the paradigm of inefficiency and corruption. Then Berlusconi came and basically bought that party all-together.
In the last years, Salvini succesfully managed to re-invent a new Lega, presenting it as a new, national movement (no more north vs. south).
The italian government is now made of a strange alliance of 2 parties: Salvini’s Lega and DiMaio’s 5-star-movement. The only real anti-establishment one, is the latter. Unfortunately, 5-star-movement is still too naif, it didn’t have time to build a strong and competent ruling class, and it’s made of too many components (most of them being disappointed leftists, believing in direct democracy, equality, pacifism, genders, and all kind of those usual bullshit).
In conclusion, I suggest you not to take those speeches too seriously. And, regarding Italy, please do not ever think of this country as if it could act free-handed: we’re still completely tied to EU, and we won’t have any possibility of real decision until we gain international political relevance. Is Salvini the right man to do so? Not a chance whatsoever.
Gab,
What you said reminds me of the political circus that can be witnessed in Greece. Why am I not surprised? Because we are the same people. A lot of hot air and no substance.The BS is just for personal benefit and the need to stay in power at all cost. In Greece, Kammenos tried to leave the coalition government, but nobody from his party followed him (except for maybe three of his MP’s). Cusing a lot of noise and speculations in Greek media. Going back to Italy. This explains why I read that Salvini came to an agreement with EU. Haven’t read much about it though, except noticing that things to went quiet about Italy. Which means EU buttered him up.
Thanks.
Since I mentioned the current problems in Greece. The boss, Merkel came to Athens to make sure the “boys” behave and do what they’re told.
This is an article in German (I do not know what he says though):
https://www.augsburger-allgemeine.de/politik/Interview-Warum-Merkel-jetzt-zu-Alexis-Tsipras-haelt-id53130896.html
This is how you greet your boss:
https://www.documentonews.gr/article/zwntana-oi-dhlwseis-merkel-kai-tsipra-live-video-photos
This is what people say, but who cares:
https://www.documentonews.gr/article/entash-kai-xhmika-sto-kentro-ths-athhnas-kata-thn-poreia-gia-thn-episkepsh-merkel-photos
See the open arms welcome?
https://www.inewsgr.com/1/etsi-ypodechthikan-tin-merkel-tsipras-kammenos-voutsis-dourou.htm
Again I cannot agree with Rostislav Ishchenko. The EU was not created in order to remove any French-German contradictions (especially military conflicts). That was the job of the Common Market, when you still had sovereign European states. The Common Market was replaced by the EU, a copy of the US Federation, it’s main task being the termination of sovereign European states, especially Germany, and preventing any German-Russian economic union. People forget that EU countries are also NATO members, the EU being nothing more than a civilian component of NATO. Both the EU and US have central banks controlled by private bankers.
The EU can never switch to a military-political alliance with Russia, as the EU cannot survive in it’s present form, as history, culture, economics and finance prevent this. An economic alliance with Russia ? Even this is debatable, bearing in mind the financial situation of EU states, like Italy and France.
The point is that Washington does not wish to dismantle the EU in any form, as it needs it to control the sovereign states of Europe, especially Germany, and prevent Germany from moving into the Eurasian Economic Union. When the US introduced sanctions against Russia, the EU followed, and by the second half of 2016 EU states lost 100 billion euros in trade with Russia. German industrialists responded by opening subsidiaries in Russia, which employ 140.000 Russians.
It’s not a question if the EU will disintegrate, but when. Even the CIA is of the opinion that the EU will break up by 2025. And what then ? Who will turn towards Russia ? The first will certainly be Germany, which the EU, in conjunction with the US, tried to destablize by forcing it to accept more than one million false refugees.
The chief task of the Anglo-American bankers is not the break up of the EU (which is absurd), but rather using the EU for the destablization of European states, making them as weak as possible and prevent them independantly moving towards Russia and the Eurasian Economic Union. The break up of European states would certainly be an advantage. For example there are calls in Germany for Bavaria to secede. I wonder who initiated this.
London and New York bankers will certainly keep the EU alive as long as possible, using it to inflict as much damage to European states as is possible. BREXIT in Britain was an expected move. By leaving the EU, Britain will not be politically involved in the EU, but will, in conjunction with American bankers, control it’s Central Bank. This policy will only act as a catalyst in the break up of the EU and subsequently NATO. All West European countries will have payed a price for being part of the EU, financial and ethnic problems being on top of the list. Uncontrolled immigration has seen the creation of no go zones in European countries, including France, and it’s debatable if the country will be able to survive in it’s present form, seeing a breakup in the future, followed by Holland, Belgium and Sweden. The same was also intended for Germany. However, the impression is that Germany will probably survive, handling the immigration question somewhat better.
In trying to destroy Russia, the Anglo-American bankers have either destroyed, or have caused immense political, cultural, ethnic, social, economic and financial damage to West European sovereign states. I am not sure how this damage can be repaired.
And finally, how will Europe look in the future ? Russia will be there, including East European countries. As for West European countries, Germany probably has the best chance of surviving in it’s present form. For the others I am not so sure.
”Thirdly, the US isn’t interested anymore in maintaining a high standard of living in the EU, closes its markets to them, and tries to kill off European industry as a competitor to their own one.”
That’s a profoundly true observation. More than ever before, the Exceptionals and Indispensables demand everything from everybody in exchange for nothing — should corroborate their delusions all right as the militant parasites that they are.
The EU is being flooded deliberately by Third World immigrants thanks to premeditated Western (US and EU) imperialist mayhem and murder. Small wonder that the common Euro-trash with its sense of imperialist entitlement feels betrayed. Like a madly jealous lover, the middle classes and labour aristocracies perceive their erstwhile benefactors as cheating on them, with the dead serious intent of ditching them unceremoniously sooner rather than later. Pauperisation always hurts, sure, but it’s an excruciating pain to those who don’t understand how it could possibly happen to themselves.
On second thought, it should be admitted that to certain peoples of Eastern Europe, the US does not, in fact, demand everything from everybody in exchange for nothing. The faithful are duly rewarded by benign protection.
Ishchenko’s articles – both this one and the one about the US – are both thoughtful and perceptive.
I keep wondering if the more thoughtful people in both the US and Europe see where all these things are heading. Europe could be ripped apart if it doesn’t start caring about its own people. And the US could be left without allies, if it continues to flail around like a dying rhino.
I expect that this year, younger and thoughtful technocrats in both the US and Europe will start speaking out to their elders, to take control of this train before it goes off the cliff.
”The US faced a deficit of resources, which at first was supposed to be filled at the expense of looting Russia and China.”
Sadly, neither Russia nor China would have it. Hence the Exceptionals’ and Indispensables’ turn to put up with a corrupt and totally incompetent, dysfunctional government, LOL. If there were any true Russian and/or Chinese malevolent plotting involved, my Schadenfreude can readily be imagined.
The hegemony will loot with impunity all that strays or remains in its grasp. Currently the hegemon has its own ‘superfluous’ workers on the shortstick of a shutdown; is this a desperate money-making scheme? — as the trillion dollar military is burning these same bongo-bucks right now, without any apparent oversight, or goal. The biggest cash cow for the empire, is blankly chewing its cud in the bucolic American backyard— the obese ignoramuses of world-empire. In all likelihood nothing they own, or save in banks or Wall Street, not even their very own bodies, actually belong to them — all is plunder, if it can be plundered, it will be, and likely already has, to some extent — all that remains is the outright declaration of terror.