Putin myth in Western politics

Anna van Densky OPINION It is a seductive idea to explain personal failures with exterior factors, declining any responsibility, pointing to the extraordinary powers of deities. This impulse is as old as the world. They heroes of Iliad, waging Troy war were also explaining the misfortunes of military operations by interferences of gods and goddesses. Greeks even promoted a chance to divinity, depicting her as as a running woman with short hair, reducing an opportunity to stop her, when she passed by. (Image below: social media, happy tourists next Elgin marbles, British Museum).

However the influences of the incumbent Russian President are depicted as far more grande, than just momentum services of the goddess of Chance, passing by. In modern Western discours Vladimir Putin has received the central place on the Olympus, representing powers of Zeus (Jupiter) himself, overthrowing and making kings.

The so called Russianmeddling in elections“, appeared after the failure of the American Democrats to win the third presidential mandate in a raw, and was presented to broader public as an explanation of this political loss, in a desperate attempt to “save face“. In the beginning the concept was received with a lot of scepticism and even irony, but after a huge investment into promotion, it was firmly integrated into political environment. Subsequently Trump era in politics is characterised not only by return of nation state as a major entity in political process, and its antagonism with globalists, but also by an unprecedented magnitude of invasion of mythology into politics.

As a result of adventurism and opportunism, modern political process is plagued by mythology, flooding public information space with legends and images deriving from archaic concepts. Explaining every political failure with supranatural powers of Putin-Jupiter is intoxicating, and discrediting the democratic political culture by imposing the idea of divinity, demoralising electorate and impacting negatively people’s creativity. It is also catastrophic for future of democracies, preventing entire societies from analysing and correcting human errors.

The continuation of attributing Brexit to influence of PutinDeity” will cause further decline of the EU27, derailing rational and imposing mythological into politics, averting scientific process of examination of phenomena of Euro scepticism, while imposing fatalism and paralysis in face of supranatural powers, leading to immobility and total collapse of the bloc.

EU budget: Sassoli’s Passions

Anna Van Densky OPINION The vivid emotions of the European Parliament president David Sassoli over EU budget came as a surprise – previously he has never gone ‘crescendo‘ about such paramount issues as European values and fundamental rights. For example, he has never raised his voice over Catalan political prisoners in Spain, on contrary in cold blood he signed off Oriol Junqueras from Members list at first opportunity without further consideration about his fate. Zero emotion, zero humanism.

However it was a desire to receive more money to the EU purse and more independence in spending it, that caused a great deal of passion. Unlike a regular enterprise the EU apparatchiks do not consider necessary to deliver, they would like to receive “more and more” regardless their poor prestations. Apparently nobody assumed the responsibility for Brexit, which is a giant failure of the bloc – the perspective to remain in the EU was not sufficiently convincing, but in spite of this breakdown MEPs without any hesitation claim more.

Since Brexit campaign some questions have remained unanswered: the glimpse of murky waters of Brussels has not inspired citizen’s enthusiasm – 10 000 Eurocrats who receive salaries exceeding the one of the British Prime Minister left quite an impression on Europeans in dire straights.

Not less “inspiring” are the Members of the European Parliament, who have successfully forgotten about the concept of rotation, and enjoy life-long career of “eternal” Membership with all included privileges, shiny limousines with chauffeurs at service of “servants of people”, adding some polish to discrete charms of European political bourgeoisie. A diabolo, qui est simia dei!

(Where god has a church the devil will have his chapel).

Brexit by defalut looming

There are no reasons for optimism in Brussels, where the heads of states and governments are meeting for the European Union Summit on March 21-22: there is hardly anyone who believes that the Westminster will endorse Theresa May‘s Article 50 Agreement.

In absence of any changes in the text of the negotiated for two years deal itself, it is only context that changes, the perception of losses endorsing the deal, or preferring no-deal damages.However it is unlikely the MPs will change their minds, vote for the Agreement they have rejected two times already.

On the Brexit, we need to be clear about ourselves, our British friends and our peoples. The withdrawal agreement cannot be renegotiated. In case of a British negative vote, we would go to a no-deal” explains Emmanuel Macron. At his arrival to the #EUCO the President ensured that France is ready for no-deal scenario, and will support enterprises, especially small businesses, but also fishery.

However in case the Westminster decides to accept May’s deal next week, the EU is ready to extend the Brexit deadline to 22 May, a day before the European elections vote will start. The top EU Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier said, while arriving to the Council, that a short extension can be only “conditional”.

EU avoids speculations on II Brexit referendum

The carefully worded statement on possibility of the second Brexit referendum in UK reflects the cautions attitude of the EU institutions to possible repeated plebiscite, attributing to the first one a status of a ‘dressed rehearsal’.

First and utmost, the EU27 does not wish to make an impression of a player, influencing the cause of events, and especially its impact on the future of Britons, to avoid being blamed for interference in home affairs of a sovereign state. Although the grounds for retaining the UK in the EU are in place, ensured by the European Court of Justice (Luxembroug)  the further maneuvering are far too risky to be undertaken publicly.

Dabbing the UK  claims as “nebulous“, European Commission president Jean-Claude Juncker has already slipped, receiving an explosion of fury from both of camps: the Brexiteers and the Remainers.

The tough talk with Prime Minister Theresa May made headlines, but did not bright any sympathy to Brussels, blamed to exaggerate the demands over the notorious Irish-border guarantee – ‘backstop‘. For many British legislators the requests of an indefinite ‘backstop‘ will create the major controversy, risking to pull the Brexit deal down while voting in the House of Commons.

The rigid position of the EU27, and reluctance to introduce any amendments in the Brexit deal ahead of the ratification, can be interpreted as a wish of its failure, with a hope of a the collapse of May‘s government, subsequently leading to the II referendum. and cancellation of Brexit. However those who promote the scenario forget about the high risks to receive the second rejection, damaging beyond repair the image of the bloc already in a profound crisis. The EU is caught between a rock and a hard place…

EU wrestles May into II referendum

The EU top negotiator Michel Barnier has put the cards on the table offering British Prime Minister Theresa May to postpone Brexit for one year. However one month would be suffice to launch the second referendum procedure in alliance with the Remaines in the House of Commons, including pro-EU Tory MPs in May’s own camp.

The frankness of Barnier brought certain relieve explaining the outstanding difficulty of the talks – the EU does everything possible to keep the UK ‘in’, making problem of every issue. #PeoplesVote is the ultimate goal of the Brexit talks, which follows the EU logic. If you vote ‘wrong’ you have to vote again until you aline with Brussels interests. Will May accept the EU27 ULTIMATUM tonight? She has 30 minutes of dinner speech to clarify her intentions. Afterwards the world will know if Brexit referendum was just a dressed rehearsal for a II one, or Britons really mean it.

 

Citizens versus ‘United States of Europe’

According to the YouGov poll published 30% of Germans and 28% of French support the idea of the United States of Europe, while 33% and 26¨% respectively, disagree. In other countries, such as Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Norway and the UK, the population largely opposed the proposal, with around half of the respondents speaking against the idea.

Earlier this month in Germany an SPD party convention  former president of European parliament Schulz suggested transformation the European Union  into a the “United States of Europe” by 2025 and adopting a constitution, realising the dream of the block’s forefathers: Robert Schuman and Jean Monnet.

 

 

Brexit negotiations pessimistic forecast

Anna van Densky, OPINION

The repeated requests for ‘clarifications’ from behalf of the EU27 articulated by the chief negotiator Michel Barnier reflect the state of the disbelief of the block vis-à-vis Britons who voted for abandoning of Europe’s project. In a long list of issues to be settled to the UK membership expiration date, the rights of the EU citizens, and the payments of fees beyond departure date are among the most controversial.

The demands of Barnier to create a three million strong growing expat community in UK, subdued to the EU law under umbrella of the European court of Justice, attributing it supremacy in jurisdiction over these citizens, and offering the European Commission right to monitor the situation, is de facto a claim of creating a EU27 enclave in the UK.

Nowadays the two groups of expats are different not only in numbers, as the Europeans are roughly three times more numerous in the UK, but also have different demographic potential. If the UK group has a large segment of senior citizens, which will be reduced with time for natural reasons, the Europeans represent the young generation with growing families, eager to pass their status to children. The demographic potential of 3,3 million of Europeans including more than a half a million of children in need of schooling  is in stark  contrast with the decreasing group of British wealthy senior citizens purchasing properties, and healthcare on continent.  As the recent study shows the biggest UK citizens community resides in Spain – more than 300 thousand people, and one-third of them are over 65, presumably retired.

However it is not economic, but political potential of EU growing group that should be of concern for Britons, risking to face a sizable problem in hosting a young and fast growing community, which can be a subject to a different kind of manipulations in the hands of the Brussels bureaucracy. In reality Barnier promotes the European community in the UK as a Trojan horse, serving the EU interests in the UK, and not the interests of the community itself, which naturally should be aiming at integration, and not prioritising the ties with the continent they have abandoned.

The other contradictory claim derives from the EU27 ‘divorce’ concept of Brexit, which is also at odds with the enshrined in Lisbon Treaty right of a state to cancel its membership. With the  ‘divorce’ concept Brussels is attempting to plant in public conscience the idea of ‘allowance’,  ethically framing the move of taking Prime minister Theresa May to cleaners.

If brushing away the profane description of the process, imposed by the European Commission, the membership cancellation does not include any membership fee beyond the actual legal period of being in the ranks of the European Union project. However the EU27 with a remarkable tenacity attempts to force the UK to pay the fees until the end of the financial term to ensure the stability for the European programmes until the finale of the current institutional mandate for the EU top executives, prioritising their personal political ambitions over long standing strategic interests of the continental Europeans, and Britons.

The exaggerated claims of the EU27 are rooted in the denial  of the reality of Brexit, namely the rejection of the UK citizens to continue their engagement with the European project, shifting from Single Market to European superstate. The obsessive pursuit of Brussels financial interests, and claims of an exclusive status to EU expats, will force the UK to leave without a deal, and this episode will leave a profound scar in relations between former partners for generations to come.

Brexit talks in Brussels

Britain’s Brexit minister David Davis vowed to “get down to work” ahead of a first full round of negotiations, however the gap between the EU27 financial claims, and the UK readiness to contribute to Europe’s purse after departure remains huge, so is the order of talks, imposed by the bloc, insisting on settling the ‘divorce’ bill first, and arranging a new framework of relations after.

The EU27 financial claims widely considered as an Apple of Discord between Brussels and the UK government, accepting to contribute beyond Brexit in some programmes, but not in a lavish ways the EU apparatchiks desire. The departure of the second net contributor leaves a huge hole in the EU27 budget, without an immediate solution how to mend it, putting many EU projects at risk.

The incumbent EU executives are also looking for the ways to conclude their mandate without having egg on their faces for shrinking activities in European project. Many experts consider that the Enlargement to the East without respect of Copenhagen criteria, and open door migration policy undermined the EU, forcing Britons to leave. There are many forecasts the UK will not be the only country eager to end its membership in the advanced democracies club, increasingly shifting away from its original concept of stability and prosperity in Europe.

UK to walk away without a deal?

 

trump-and-may

The UK departure without a deal as a concept appears persistently in different contexts, approaching the date of the triggering Article 50, promised by Prime Minister Theresa May in March, likely before the Treaty of Rome celebrations on the 27th, but after the Dutch general elections on the 15th. The UK officials do not wish to harm the fragile ties with the EU27, and complicate the situation of one millions of compatriots, chosen the continental Europe as their home.

The hostile rhetoric of the EU high officials, especially the Jean-Claude Juncker, the head of the European Commission, and the veteran of the EU project, made many politicians and experts to consider the departure without any settlement as a viable option, shielded by the WTO rules.

The perspective of the free-trade agreement with the US, opened after the visit of the PM May to the White House, makes ‘no deal better than a poor deal’ approach a leading trend.

Picture: US President Donald Trump and UK Prime Minister Theresa May walking through White House gallery.

Sir Rogers: adieu to ‘belle époque’

sam_3924

The stepping down of the UK’s ambassador to the EU, Sir Ivan Rogers continues a ‘natural’ process of  replacement of Eurocentrics by Europscpetics, namely ‘remainers’ for ‘brexiters’. If in times of his appointment in 2013 the enthusiasm for common European future was an asset,  as much as along  the ‘StrongerIn’ campaign,  in post-Brexit vote period it is a handicap. The times are changing, but not everyone is ready to change with times, some prefer to keep their personal integrity, speaking their ‘truth’ to those at power. Their choice should be respected.

But the ‘remainers’- poor losers they are – hurried to use to political ends the personal decision of ambassador, instead of accepting it as a part of a logical renewal. The type of a damaging for the common interest frenzy as both the UK and EU27 need pragmatic approach to diminish the emotional element and to implement the will of British people in a constructive way without lyrics and laments.
With a pinch of English humor in a Swiftian style, Sir Rogers hinted on an “exiting” year in Brussels ahead of his stuff, the experience he has no intention to share. However he kindly leaves some guidelines formally to his staff, but in reality to his bosses in London, the element many ‘remainers’ hurried to present as a ‘blow’ to the PM Theresa May. In vain. It is not ‘indecisive’ government, it is a EU project on the crossroads.
From the first lines Rogers admits the need to form a stable and devoted new team to follow the process from evocation of Article 50 through the negotiations to the end.
He also advises the replacement of his deputy to create an entirely new leadership for the diplomatic crew to engage fully in the future negotiations as one team.
Complaining about absence of clarity for Brexit negotiation objectives, the same time Rogers looks beyond his Brussels ‘situ’ to acknowledge the fact of changing political environment the UK is facing while departing from the project.  Indeed, the UK government has no crystal ball to guess the outcome of the multiple elections taking place in EU27 in 2017. The national elections that might create a political environment  from ‘favorable’ to ‘fair’ for Brexit negotiators. Why hurry to push the Article 50 button?..
Sir Rogers departs in a firm belive that the future of his country depends on skills of technocrats, negotiating every detail in trade agreements, but the history shows that the future is sculptured by multiple factors, among which the political will has a prior place. Europeans have witnessed a whirlwind of changes since the collapse of the fall of Berlin Wall, reminding that treaties can be abandoned not only by negotiations but also under clausual rebus sic stantibus,   or because of  a total change of the context.
The European institutions employees made us think that the threads for the future are in eurocrat’s hands. One of the evaporating myth of  ‘la belle époque’ of the EU, that will never come back, because its beauty and glamour touched just a few, and made unhappy too many.