Florence speech as Renaissance Fata Morgana

Anna van Densky, OPINION

Public speeches of politicians are not confessions,
even less can they be compared to an experience on
a couch of a psychoanalyst, and Britons can only hope
that the Florence speech of PM Theresa May
was a public relations moment, and not a roadmap
for #Brexit.
Even at first glance once can notice that the aims
of president of the EU executive body – European Commission –
Jean-Claude Juncker are opposite to May’s wish to achieve ‘Renaissance’
in a framework of a renewed partnership between
the UK and the reduced to 27 members bloc.

In his September state of the Union speech Juncker clearly
formulated the goals: a full-forward to the United States of Europe,
with mentioning Brexit in a sinister wow the UK would “regret” the
decision to leave the bloc soon. The intention to enshrine Brexit
as a negative example forever has been the only concept circulating
in Brussels corridors of power, where the EU diplomats
in ‘confidential’ talks would hint on only possible future
of London, and it was not a splendor of Florence,

but as declining Venice (or fall of Venice)Venice decline the inevitable poor fate of the rebellious  against Brussels bureaucracy Britons.

May’s calls for Renaissance are also utopia because of the United Kingdom
post-Brexit prosperity will set a precedent and give an example to many others, namely the old members of the EU to leave the block, reestablishing sovereignty – the ‘heresy’ leading to collapse of the United States of Europe project.

Certainly, the proposal to pay fee beyond Brexit May made is attractive
to the EU federal state architects, however it does not exclude
their profound concern with the post-Brexit success of the Leavers.
The best scenario for the EU would be to continue to accept the UK fee,
and diminish its political influence, meanwhile imposing ‘four freedoms’ dogma.
So Britons would obey Brussels, pay for the construction of the EU superstate, preserving de facto four freedoms, including the reception of migrants,
but without a political presentation in the EU intuitions.

A “wonderful woman” as president Trump rightfully characterised May for her many virtues,  has been already once lured into a trap by president Juncker, reportedly
convincing her to declare the snap elections she lost.
Calls for Renaissance in relentless search for compromise to satisfy the EU quenching thirst for power and finance, will certainly please Brussels,
happy to find in May a Remainer leading Brexit.
But do Britons need a head of government, bowing to Brussels in Brexit talks?

Henry VIII

Imagine Henry VIII proposing to Pope:
‘Look, we don’t believe you are an apostolic successor to Saint Peter, you holding the keys to Haven, etc, – so I will become the head of Church in my country, but
we continue to pay you for two more years according to previous obligations,
and then we create a new equal-footed
partnership for mutual benefit and prosperity.
Please, let’s go for Renaissance together!”

Would the pontiff accept it?
Ha-ha:)

Pope FB

#SOTEU2017: Apogee of dogmatism

#SOTEU2017. Startling by its neglect of the realities of life, the State of Union speech has been hovering high above like a banner dragged by a colorful hot air-balloon in blue sky to admire it for a few moments, before going back to blacks.
One could hardly associate numerous full of optimism slogans of president Jean-Claude Juncker with the grim realities of millions of Europeans struggling to make the ends meet. The magic formula ‘More Europe!’ – the ‘philosopher’s stone’ of the European bureaucrats, supposedly to turn everything into gold became a source of disquietude to extend, some block’s most prolific member prefered to end the engagement, concerned with the sovereignty.

The idea of moving towards the ‘United States of Europe’ – the ultimate dream of the forefathers of the project, resurrecting continent from the ashes of the WWII seem less appealing nowadays, in a totally different political context. The times have changed, but the eurocrats, unlike the rest of us have not changed with times:( remaining guardians of more than half-a-century old doctrines, that are clashing with for modern dynamic and flexible word.
The inseparable four freedoms of the EU became more of a problem, instead of a solution: open borders, and free movement cause insecurity, and is generally perceived as the major reasons of the UK break away from the block, but not but the eurocrats.

Simply brushing aside the problems related to the EU profound #Brexit crisis, Juncker ordered ‘fast forward’ to the bright future of the EU27, without any clarification how the intensified integration will be funded in absence of the UK, the second net contributor to the EU purse.

Juncker’s vow #Brtions will regret soon their decision to vote leave, sounded sinister, sensed as a threat, while the policy of making ‘negative example’ from the UK till now has been the only reaction from the EU institutions, eager to ‘receive’ a mega ‘allowance’ as if in divorce case. Making a scarecrow from the EU supposedly should stop anyone else from turning to a seditious idea of leaving the block regardless its results delivery.

With Geert Wilders (PvV) growing numbers of supporters in the Netherlands; narrowly defeated Norbert Hofer (FPO) in Austria; Marine Le Pen (FN) reaching the second round of presidential elections in France; with AfD flexing muscle, anticipating entering Bundestag in Germany, – within this political context the old EU doctrines look outdated. So does the EU leader, reminiscent of the late members of Politburo of the Soviet Union, loyal to the ideals of their youth, and unable to adapt to the changing world.

Fragilized by age, but refusing to assume the responsibility for Brexit as the major EU failure, still insisting on the marvels of the membership of the bloc, Jean-Claude Juncker looks like a relic of another era. In epilogue of the debating the State of the Union speech with the MEPs, publicly complaining about his health, he evoked an idea of necessity for an urgent renewal of the EU leadership. The need of change of generations obvious even for the most devoted Eurocentrics to avoid the imminent decline, and collapse like the late USSR.