Tusk squealer’s help to Russian democratic opposition

With his public declaration of being “no fan of Russia”, the president of the European Council Donald Tusk offered a squealer’s help to Russian pro-European democratic opposition at crucial time of upcoming presidential elections, discrediting their giant efforts to convince electorate that Brussels is opponent of Kremlin, but not to people of Russia. Those, who wanted to vote for opposition to Russia’s ruler Vladimir Putin, from now onwards know, that they have no friends in Brussels. The top political body – the EU Council – is chaired by an open russophobe – Donald Tusk. Many could guess previously, but this affidavit put an end to any doubt – a protagonist from Cold war times degrades the relations between Europeans and Russians.

However this ‘affidavit’ of Tusk disaffection to Russia is not only undermining the efforts of the opposition forces in Russia, because it clarifies that pro-European electorate do not have friends among the EU top players, but it also has put an end to the entire EU policy of promotion of European values, and democracy in Russia, entirely dependent on confidence of Russian people that the West wishes them well. After Tusk’s declaration this confidence was abolished: any offer from Brussels from now onwards is a poisonous chalice.

For those who followed Tusk activities from his appointment in an obscure procedure behind closed doors, the affidavit of disaffection to Russia is a finishing touch to his public profile: in opposition to the U.S. President Donald Tump, undermining the government in his native Poland,  and now openly declaring his confrontational attitude to the EU top trading partner, – Tusk demonstrates total absence of a diplomatic fiber. But not only, completely taken by his personal emotional perceptions, Tusk has been unable to raise above mediocre to level of a statesman with sense of responsibility and vision. Generously remunerated loyalty to the EU institutions, wrongly understood as an enmity to the world outside European Quarter, produced squealer’s help of an EU apparatchik, matching the worst examples of dogmatism of Soviet era, he is not able to step out.

 

Rome Summit: Tusk as EU symbol of strife

SAM_1713

While EU Council president Donald Tusk (pictured) is preparing the anniversary  of the Treaty of Rome Summit (25.03.2017), focusing of the ‘unity’ message of EU27 in post-Brexit era, the argument over his own re-appointment ignoring Polish government’s  protest, remains open, poisoning the historic event.

Although the Summit is informal, the open confrontation with Poland over re-appointment of Tusk is a toxic issue, that would be impossible to play down or brush off. The EU diplomacy showed  poor judgment when suggested Prime minister Beata Szydlo (53) would have no choise but submit to the will the fellow EU members, openly imposing Tusk – an active political opponent of her incumbent government.   Szydlo, the miner’s daughter, showed a remarkable capacity to withstand punch, and audacity to retaliate, rejecting to sign the Council conclusions. If this pattern is chosen as a long-term strategy, it will mean, as long as Tusk chairs the EU meetings, Poland will continue to obstruct the outcome, not honoring a legal status to its decisions. This conflict over Tusk might not hinder the upcoming ‘informal’ Summit in Rome legally, but it will certainly harm its image politically.

While preparing the Declaration of the Summit in Rome, calling for ‘unity’ as a universal remedy from all kind of problems Europeans suffer, Tusk’s controversial chairmanship, weakens the message a priori.   “Taken individually, we would be sidelined by global dynamics. Standing together is our best chance to influence them, and to defend our common interests and values … Our Union is undivided and indivisible,” – Tusk’s draft declaration calls, making this words to haunt him like a bitter irony.

Being ‘an apple of discord’ between Poland and the rest of the EU, Tusk himself is a at most eloquent physical evidence of the profound crisis of the EU, and a symbol of strife and decline.

The draft, dated March 16 and prepared by the contraversial chairman of EU summits Donald Tusk, will pass by all the capitals  next week before being endorsed in Rome on the 25th of March.

Anna van Densky OPINION published in @EuropeDiplomatic

#Fotyga: propaganda toxic substance

fotyga-ep

The MEP Anna Fotyga’s report on ”Russian and Islamist propaganda” debated in European Parliament is one of the most surrealistic documents produced by an assembly in modern history. Even from a first glance it looks exotic resembling a hybrid of a Nile crocodile and a red-tailored hawk – a monster from Middle Ages artist Jeroen Bosch paintings of Hell.

Certainly it is reflecting a personal animosity of Ms Fotyga – a former Polish #Kaczyński Foreign affairs minister – towards Kremlin, degrading Russian mass media undertakings to Islamic state information warfare against the West.

One can question a rational behind the choice of the rapporteur who has not been able to abandon Cold War modality in 25 years after the fall of Berlin Wall,
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.