confusing Russia with the USSR, as if still an existing entity along with the Islamic state.
Knowing the slow pace of the EU institutions one can guess that the idea of the report was conceived in a firm believe of the continuation of the US Democrat’s policy of sanctioning Russia. Within a new political situation, when president elect has declared Russia as a ‘partner’, the Fotyga’s report looks not only dramatically outdated, but also phantasmagoria.
An obsessive wish to degrade Russia’s mass-media, namely #RussaTodayTV to propaganda machine of the Islamic state (IS) deprived the report of substance, because neither problems of the communication streams from Russia or from IS to the EU was properly addressed.
One could say that it would have been a regular piece of ‘brining sand to beach’ institutional work, if not unforeseen dangerous by effects.
Today the US election results ensuring a change in the Western foreign policy is a key factor, making Fotyga’s report outdated, however it is more than about looks.
The presidential elections process in France indicated two major favorites: the Republican Francois Fillion and Front National Marine Le Pen – both declaring Russia as a natural partner of France. The inevitable upcoming change of the foreign policy course of the founding member state of the EU, will have a profound influence on the EU-Russia relations confronting the East European countries with a necessity to abandon chronic Cold War modus vivendi.
The reluctance to change attitude vis-à-vis Russia would create additional divides in relations between EU old and new member states, already existing in the issues of migration.The rejection of Poland to take fair share of migrants from Italy and Greece completed with the rejection of accepting a pragmatic approach towards Kremlin might be too much for the Union to bear: these cracks will start a tectonic shift between Eastern (Vicegrad group) and Western Europe,signifying its end of the status quo EU27+UK earlier than #Brexit happens.
Turning to a really burning issue of finding an anti-dot for the perilous ideology of Islamic state, Fotyga reports does not break through the standard kit of wooden language formula, already proven to be pretty useless in protecting youth from terrorist recruiters. Subsequently it would make sense to convey the preparation of such a report to a representative of a country having the most extensive experience with the IS recruiting victims – Belgium.
Concluding, one can propose two separate reports on effects of communications, offering IS to a Belgium politician and experts, and to a Latvian, where the biggest Russian community in Europe lives, to relay on first hand experience and advice.
However ending shameful practise of Russian non-citizens in the EU, namely in Estonia and Latvia would be at most effective promotion for the European values without any ‘counter-propaganda’ strategies to invent. It is hardly makes sense to invest money in development of virtual projects, describing wonders of Europe to the EU Russians who continue stateless existence long after the collapse of the USSR.
Finally, the simple arithmetic shows the malaise of the European politicians voting the controversial Fotyga’s report converted into a resolution: 304 MEPs for, 179 against, 208 (!) abstentions.
‘EU strategic communication to counteract propaganda against it by third parties’ drafted by MEP Fotyga passed, the toxic spilled, collateral damages to be estimated later.