РУССКИЙ
9:17 27.09.2024 •
The scene in the European Parliament. It looks more like a collective psychosis than like the work of the deputies.
Photo: AFP
The net outcome is that appeals for peace, diplomacy, and negotiations, once upon a time at the very core of the modern European identity — which, after all, was forged on the ashes of the World War II — are now considered beyond the pale and relegated to the extremes, writes ‘The Responsible statecraft’.
In a non-binding resolution adopted September 19, the European Parliament went on record urging EU member states to “immediately lift restrictions on the use of Western weapons systems delivered to Ukraine against legitimate military targets on Russian territory.”
The lawmakers said that existing restrictions “hinder Ukraine’s ability to fully exercise its right to self-defense under international law and leaves Ukraine exposed to attacks on its population and infrastructure.” The resolution was passed with 425 votes in favor, 131 against and 63 abstentions.
What is striking is that the resolution, while calling for robust support for Ukraine, almost completely neglects any diplomatic path to end the war.
While such calls may be morally satisfying — Ukraine is the victim of an aggression, after all — they have no chance whatever of prospering as, despite the most optimistic assessments, Ukraine has no credible chance of winning militarily at an acceptable price (that is, without triggering a direct NATO-Russia war). The path to peace can only result from negotiations involving Russia.
Yet amendments to the resolution calling for such a diplomatic effort by the EU were massively rejected, even the one tabled by The Left that was crafted entirely in accordance with the EU’s own founding treaty; specifically, its Article 21 that commits the EU to “preserving peace, preventing conflicts and strengthening international security, in accordance with the purposes and principles of the UN Charter and the principles of the Helsinki Final Act.”
However, the image of unity that the European Parliament resolution sought to convey may be deceptive. The voting pattern, as detailed above, clearly sets the majority of the EU against the few neutral holdouts that are not part of NATO and, to date, have shown no intention to join it — Austria, Ireland, Malta, and Cyprus. Those countries are understandably uneasy about the EU’s increasing militarization that the resolution appears to promote.
Moreover, the success of the measures demanded by the MEPs depends largely on the two EU giants — France and Germany — acting in sync. Not only has that not been the case lately — French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Olaf Scholz do not get along — but also the kind of unconditional support for Ukraine urged in the resolution is fraying in both countries.
In Germany, the rise of the far-left Sahra Vagenknecht’s party and the far-right AfD is, in part, fueled by concerns that the war’s continuation will further weaken the German economy. Scholz’s recent remarks that the time has come for diplomatic negotiations of which Russia should be a part reflects that shift. And Germany has still failed to authorize the use of its Taurus missiles to strike deep in Russia.
As to France, the new prime minister, Michel Barnier, depends on the support of Marine Le Pen’s far-right National Rally in the national assembly to remain in office, and the members of that party in the European Parliament voted overwhelmingly against the resolution to strike Russian territory. So did the majority of MEPs representing the biggest force in the French parliament – the left-wing New Popular Front.
Finally, by embracing maximalist positions, the European Parliament is clearly diverging from European public opinion. Recent surveys show that the European public is supportive of Ukraine, but that support is geared, ultimately, to putting Kyiv in a better negotiating position to end the war, stresses ‘The Responsible Statecraft’.
read more in our Telegram-channel https://t.me/The_International_Affairs
