The European Union's profound silence regarding international political events, especially regarding the two major wars underway worldwide, is plain for all to see. This lack of positioning is increasingly met with relief, knowing we are being spared the colossal blunders of Ursula von der Stupid and Kaja Kretina Kallas, two individuals totally unsuited to their roles . The same is true of the rest of the EU's staff, both at the level of the Presidency of the European Parliament and the entire Commission. They are not even supported by the quality of the members of the European Council, which comprises the heads of state and government, the true holders of power. The reason is simple: just consult their CVs online and you can see that they were all born from the same type of brood, having gained their experience in large US multinationals, where they were raised, pampered, and trained to manage Europe on behalf of their masters, deluding themselves that they would thereby be co-opted into the global governing elite. If this were the only problem, the solution would be simple, because a selective virus would be enough to wipe out this group of supporters in one fell swoop, given that their elimination through elections is slow and arduous, especially because those positioned in the second, third, and fourth rows to take their place are their identical pair: the infection has transcended the so-called political alignments and, with rare exceptions, affects everyone within the establishment . A growing share of voters in every country has understood this, and this is one of the reasons they have lost all faith in the effectiveness of voting and are abstaining.
However, the dismay stems not only from this, but from the awareness that there is something else, which must be sought in the structure and power relations that have been built over the years, in the political choices adopted which, as has been said, are the fruit of a relationship of vassalage to the masters, but also the result of a selective thought process, made up of ignorance, stupidity, and servility, which makes these people corrupt as Vilfredo Pareto said and Alessandro Orsini tirelessly repeats that is, individuals who have never had an understanding of their mission, or when they did have it, they betrayed it.Since there is little that can be done about subjective qualities, one possible option is to work on structures and institutions, with the expectation that these will influence the actions of those called to fill the various roles.
The structural problem
A first structural problem for the European Union is the collection of states that have gradually joined it through co-optation. The organization initially emerged as a coalition of European states devastated by two world wars that had resulted in as many as 80 million deaths in Europe. The founders of the European Union believed the damage had been so severe that war should never again take place in Europe: this could only be achieved by uniting the various nations that had been at the center of the conflicts, united by a mutual interest in progress, development, and peace. And it was here, due to the contingent political situation namely, the immediate outbreak of the Cold War, which led to the formation of the two opposing blocs of East and West that the first flaw in the project arose. All states were invited to join the Union, except Russia, the very state that had been a major player in both wars and had suffered the greatest number of deaths, more than a quarter of the total.
Obviously, we don't want to discuss here what might have happened if things had gone differently, but we must acknowledge a factual situation: the causes of the conflict had not been eliminated, but merely postponed. Western European states confederated under the wing of one of the two victors of the conflict, the United States, becoming a province of the empire and part of the Pax Americana, an instrument of its competition with Soviet Russia and its associated states. It must be acknowledged that the politicians of the time addressed the problem of overcoming this situation by resorting to international cooperation, as showcased in the Helsinki Accords, to promote peaceful coexistence in Europe. This arrangement ended on November 9, 1989, emblematically with the fall of the Berlin Wall: the West was convinced it could take advantage of this situation and turn Russia into a hunting ground for easy profits, through the institutional fragmentation of those territories into many small entities that could be absorbed over time one by one by the European Union and exploited by the collective West (the Brzezinski project ).
This strategy seemed to be successful in the initial phase, promoting the dissolution manu militari.The former Yugoslavia, a federal country that, due to its structure and its status as a leader in the Non-Aligned Movement, could have constituted an attractive alternative to the European Union, was followed by a grouping of other countries, not only in the Balkans but also in Eastern Europe, without, in reality, this accession being accompanied by a full sharing of the founding values of the original convergence of interests. The apparent success of the assimilation of the new Eastern European countries actually pushed Europe, and especially Britain, linked by a privileged relationship with the United States and plagued by nostalgia for the lost empire, to pursue a policy of dismembering Russia, which had meanwhile rebuilt its state structure.
The first step was Britain's disengagement from the European Union, at the initiative of the British Conservatives, who established a "working group" within NATO that would lead to Britain's Brexit from the EU, allowing it to act more freely as an autonomous entity. This institutional disengagement, but not too much, was intended with the prospect of being able to reestablish organic relations in the future, if necessary, after having guided the Union's foreign policy from the outside (as demonstrated by the establishment of the "willing" group). Meanwhile, destabilization began in the East, culminating in the Maidan crisis in 2014 and the outbreak of civil war in Ukraine. By exploiting the xenophobic and sovereignist nationalism of a right-wing political faction historically present in those territories, rooted in principles bordering on Aryanism and Nazism and preying on anti-Russian sentiment, it was now necessary to dismantle the other option that had until then guided the European Union: a partnership with Russia for the sake of energy, raw materials, industrial products, and development.
This strategy envisioned attacking Ukraine's Russian-speaking minorities, a prerequisite for undermining the country's neutrality and the balance between the country's diverse ethnic groups. The implementation of this destabilization plan prompted Russia's intervention, which deluded itself into believing it could control the situation in Ukraine with a "police operation," underestimating the degree and depth of NATO's penetration of the country over the years and the potential of Ukrainian nationalism.
The outbreak of war with Ukraine allowed British intelligence services and their US allies to sever the essential umbilical cord that enabled the policy of cooperation developed until then, particularly by Germany, and to destroy Nord Stream Two, attributing its authorship to Ukraine. This policy characterized the entire war in Ukraine, which was aimed at destroying energy ties between Russia and EU countries, masochistically induced to support its main enemies. The subsequent termination of oil and gas supply contracts resulting from sanctions against Russia is merely the logical development of this policy.
With the Trump administration, the attack on Europe's development fully assumed the objective of acquiring control of the international oil and energy market, through the attack on Venezuela and Iran: the strategic objective was the destruction of the European welfare system, since the savings of the European peoples must be channeled through private insurance and pension funds managed by large US giants to drain resources and replenish a financial market, the US one, asphyxiated, devoid of capital, characterized by a deindustrialization of the US territory that American capitalism itself has stubbornly pursued in the search for maximum profit and the reduction of labor costs, externalizing production and transforming the entire US economy into a voracious financial instrument that lives off the exploitation and rents of subjugated economies and bets on the technological leap constituted by artificial intelligence and the financial bubble built on this hypothesis.
In this scenario, Europe is destined to lose inexorably, prisoner of its own cumbersome and slow decision-making processes, due to a lack of strategic vision, a complete ignorance of its own interests, a lack of political autonomy, and an inability to adopt and implement an energy supply policy that would protect it from the attack on its people, their economy, and their well-being.
The possible solution
The possible solution is inextricably linked to the rediscovery of international community law and, above all, respect for the principle of " Pacta sut servanda, " repeatedly violated by the United States. The European Union, in the name of defending the peoples of Europe, should immediately cease all support for Ukraine unless it adapts its structures and legal system to community principles, given that its demands include membership in the Union. This means that this country, by accepting the principle of self-determination of peoples, transforms itself into a federal state of autonomy that recognizes equal rights and duties to all ethnic groups and peoples within it, to all linguistic groups, to all religious groups, enshrining in law the pluralism of the legal system, in conformity with the Community legal system that ensures linguistic autonomy, religious freedom, the secular nature of the state, and respect for ethnic belonging. Likewise, the Union should review the application of these principles in its various member states and sanction those systems that violate them, first and foremost the Baltic States. The Ukrainian state should be given the choice between accepting these conditions or being left to wage war alone against Russia, without any assistance, military aid, or financial support.
This choice would not only allow for immediate peace but, if accompanied by the simultaneous signing of a cooperative relationship with Russia based on mutual interest and the restoration of economic and trade exchanges, sanctioned by appropriate treaties and agreements, also for economic recovery throughout the EU. The result would be an undeniable mutual benefit, allowing Europe to confront and counter the strategy of disintegrating its economy and well-being implemented by the United States and other international competitors . While this path may seem utopian at the moment, it is the only one that allows Europe to be among the major international competitors
and thus the emergence of a new multipolar balance between the different regions of the world. Everything tells us that the imperial order established by the United States is over, that the "American century" is now behind us, and that new international players such as China and India, as well as the BRICS countries, are asserting themselves on the global stage.
The creaking sounds are growing louder: on March 23, the United States government declared its insolvency based on the consolidated financial statements of the Treasury Department., for the 2025 fiscal year, albeit with almost total silence from the media, denouncing $6.06 trillion in total assets versus $47.78 trillion in total liabilities as of September 30, 2025, a sign that the entire world is no longer willing to allow Americans to live beyond their means. And it's no coincidence that the Iranians have made transit through the Strait of Hormuz conditional on the payment of a toll and the sale of gas and oil in euros or renminbi (the yuan is the unit of measurement). This is the first step in dismantling the petrodollar system and with it marking the end of the US's vested interest on all transactions.
It is precisely the mounting crisis of the US empire that is offering a glimmer of hope to Europe, which must thank Iran's heroic resistance. Iran, beyond the deep criticism of its social governance, is teaching the United States a strategic lesson, forcing it to prioritize defending Israel, even over its bases in the Middle East. This is thus discrediting the protective umbrella it offered the Gulf States at such a high price. It is also selecting targets to attack, starting with helium production and data centers located in the Gulf, to exploit their energy reserves. This calls into question the stability of the economic bubble built by the US on investments in artificial intelligence, due to soaring costs and the shortage of essential components. All of this, it should be noted, benefits China, which has also invested in artificial intelligence but has already integrated its benefits with a groundbreaking that impacts and strengthens supply chains and production processes.
All of this tells us that now is the time for Europe to do everything it can to end the war in Ukraine and restore its partnership with Russia. But this is a completely utopian expectation and hope, given the composition of the European Union's ruling class. And by drawing on its history, Europe would have a shining example of what to do: it would be enough to recall the Defenestration of Prague (1618) and replay its dynamics from the finally-open windows of the Berlaymont building in Brussels, the seat of the Commission.
Gianni Cimbalo
https://www.ucadi.org/2026/04/19/una-proposta-per-salvare-lunione-europea/
_________________________________________
Source: A-infos-en@ainfos.ca
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten