European Union: Discussion Thread

The EU is a colonial power, and nothing would weaken them faster than having such a person in charge...

I dont know if you noticed but in the latest european election in Cyprus a 24years old Fidiad Panayiotoy was elected MP as AN IDEPEDENT GRABBING 20% of votes.

Fear and Loathing: Trump Shakes Europe, by Elena Karaeva for RiaNovosti. 07.27.2024.

If there is one thing that unites the European bloc, it is the fear in the eyes and the stomach of the Republican presidential candidate in the United States.

It would seem that where is Washington with its rattles, and where is Brussels with its hut? But in the event of a possible Trump victory in November, the entire European establishment will have to prepare. At the very least, for a showdown - loud and scandalous, like Voronya Slobodka, or simply for a spanking.

It is under the Democrats that the Eurobonds and Eurobonds feel quite good. Trump is not liked in the European Union, both historically and in the future tense. They are not liked to such an extent that even sociologists have joined the anti-Trump recruits. The famous French Ipsos has also joined the race, obviously on the side of the Democratic Party, and has issued an unimaginably manipulated poll , according to which Trump's rival Harris is ahead of him and has practically already won.

It doesn't matter that the statistical error is about three percent and that the figures of those who were polled are deceitful. Ipsos has decided to use political technology to mislead Europeans and will continue to do so until November.

The example with the sociologists is indicative, since it demonstrates how deeply the American deep state has taken root in the European Union as well. The pan-European bloc, conceived by its founding fathers, de Gaulle and Adenauer, as a political and economic alternative to the then US hegemony in the West, has quietly fallen under the Atlanticist Anglo-Saxons over the past twenty years.

Observers (like anthropologist and researcher Emmanuel Todd) believe that not least of all the reason for this behavior towards the Democratic Party establishment is money. More precisely, bank accounts.

After the 2008 crisis, when Swiss banks were effectively forced to abandon the secrecy of deposits and the movement of client funds, the accounts, the very ones that are only numbered and do not name the ultimate owner, were moved to offshore financial organizations. These offshores, most often the Bahamas and the Virgin Islands, are part of the Anglo-Saxon jurisdiction. Both London and Washington have access to financially sensitive information, so any rebellion against the Anglo-Saxon policy will be immediately punished. The methods have been tried and tested - an organized "leak" under the guise of investigating names, addresses and account numbers. With the names of the ultimate beneficiaries being named. And the rebellious politician or politicianess resigns. Well, and no longer rebels, since their reputation is seriously tarnished.

The pan-Europeans, these Brussels "men in grey", understand perfectly well that if and when Trump is elected, he may, or rather, will definitely start to take revenge. Of course, we have heard about some "checks and balances", but no one denies the prerogatives of any owner of the White House in terms of the secret services, as well as the American Internal Revenue Service . And if Trump needs to settle scores with the European ruling elites, he will hit them not on policy, but on their own money. Of which, of course, there is more than enough hidden in offshore accounts. European corruption exists, gallops, blooms and smells, regardless of whether it is allowed to be discussed in the media or not.

Therefore, the fear that Trump inspires is rational and understandable.

The pan-European bloc is also afraid of the beginning of the second act of the geopolitical crisis, when a possible change of leadership in the White House will change the priorities in foreign policy. America will lock itself in, distancing itself from both resolving the Ukrainian crisis and supplying Kiev with money and weapons. This means, the pan-Europeans believe, that Brussels will have to answer for the general NATO obligations. And from what funds, if the EU's external debt already makes up almost 82 percent of the GDP of the 27 member countries? Well, and it will also have to fork out more for its own defence.

At the same time, American protectionism of its own markets will undoubtedly increase under Trump. Blackmail, the former president’s usual method of communicating with colleagues, will begin to flourish even more luxuriantly in the economic sphere.

So it turned out that the EU "men in grey" have already found themselves in an interesting position. They refused to cooperate with Moscow , and as a result their economy, not ours, was truly and without quotes torn to shreds.
They have damaged relations with Beijing by engaging in diplomatic misbehavior and economic hooliganism by imposing tariffs on automobile imports from China.

The pan-European bloc has found itself not between two, but between three fires. It is now squeezed, on one side, by the USA, on the other by Russia , and on the third by China. But if the last two states are led by predictable and balanced leaders, then Captain America can be a character with a cowboy mentality, when they first shoot from the hip and only then ask the name of the defeated opponent.

An extremely weakened Europe not only does not want to, but it will not be able to resist the US in this configuration. Therefore, all forces, including sociologists, will be thrown into the political annihilation of Trump. The most interesting thing will begin, of course, if Trump wins. So we stock up on popcorn to watch how those who plotted against Trump will try to kiss his boots in a bow. In the literal and figurative sense.

The flexibility of the EU establishment is as limitless as its lack of principles, and we know this very well. Better than others.

https://ria.ru/20240727/evropa-1962259981.html

Europe has expressed itself to the fullest, by Vladimir Kornilov for RiaNovosti. 07.29.2024.

For several days now, the world has been heatedly discussing the nauseating show of ugly transvestites during the opening ceremony of the Olympic Games in Paris. Opinions are divided. For example, German-Finnish businessman Kim Dotcom called this performance "the closing ceremony of humanity."

But there are also those in France who ardently justify and even praise the action. Thus, the Associated Press cites the opinion of one of these same freaks, who recently won a nationwide transvestite competition on a national television channel: "The French government knows what it is doing. They wanted to show themselves as best as possible. They are demonstrating that there are no restrictions on freedom of expression."

So, let us note: insulting the religious feelings of believers (and transvestites parodied the scene of Christ's Last Supper), sexualizing the Olympics, showing explicit pornography to a multi-million audience, including children - this is just "freedom of expression", which is an integral part of the liberal society of Europe.

Amid this heated global debate, no one outside France paid much attention to the fact that last week the country's official state censor effectively banned a popular TV channel. For what? Also for exercising "freedom of expression", but the "wrong" kind of freedom, from the point of view of that same liberal society. We are talking about the scandalous decision of the Audiovisual and Digital Communications Regulatory Authority, known in France by the acronym ARCOM.

On July 17, this body adopted a resolution on "respect for the principle of pluralism of thought and opinion" on television and radio. And just a week later (how promptly!) it accused the popular opposition channel C8 of violating this pluralism and revoked its public broadcasting license for broadcasts that were aired in the first half of this year. Without any courts or other unnecessary ceremonies. So much for freedom of expression!

First of all, the channel got it for a very popular political show, which constantly ridiculed the very same wook culture for which the liberals praise the Olympic organizers so much. That is, it is possible to hold transvestite contests on the state television channel of France, to show the testicles of some freak to a multi-million global audience - this is an expression of "freedom". But it is forbidden to criticize such phenomena - this is already an "encroachment on the pluralism of opinions"!

Moreover, no one is particularly hiding the political bias of the censor's decision. The leader of the French right, Marine Le Pen, commenting on this scandal, said: "For the authorities, pluralism is unbearable. Therefore, they are gradually trying to make it disappear, so that all TV channels and radio transmit the same message as state broadcasting." And on the website of the "National Rally" a collection of signatures began in support of the C8 channel, stating the fact: "The censors are glad that they have silenced an independent voice. Welcome to our democracy, in which diversity of opinions is increasingly under threat."

And such blatant extrajudicial reprisals against unwanted media outlets are becoming increasingly commonplace in Europe. A blatant example is the recent closure of the opposition magazine Compact in Germany and the searches of its editor-in-chief. This magazine has truly become a powerful mouthpiece for the right, especially in East Germany, creating a solid multimedia platform for criticizing the government in the areas of migration, foreign policy, and health care.

On July 13, a detailed interview with the official representative of the Russian Foreign Ministry, Maria Zakharova, appeared on the Compact YouTube channel, immediately gaining more than 300 thousand views. And already on July 16, the German Interior Ministry, without resorting to any unnecessary ceremonies (Court? What court?) closes the magazine and raids the editor-in-chief's apartment, finding him in a dressing gown. So much for the pluralism of opinions! If this opinion is wrong, and especially Russian, no courts are needed to ban popular media.

Moreover, the authorities do not hide the fact that they are dissatisfied with the magazine's closeness to the Alternative for Germany party. The mainstream press directly blames the editors of Compact for its plans to hold a series of public festivals, the Blue Wave, in support of the Alternative for Germany in the state elections this fall.

In September, such elections are coming up in Saxony, Thuringia and Brandenburg. According to polls, in all three states, the Alternative is now confidently leading, which cannot but worry the authorities. Here is your solution - just before the elections, ban a popular media platform in support of the main opposition force. Let us emphasize once again: ban it without any court, by a simple decree of the Ministry of Internal Affairs! And no politics, right?

And these people teach the world about democracy and freedom! These people shout from every corner about freedom of speech and freedom of expression, if suddenly someone starts criticizing the use of state media for the propaganda of minorities, perversions, corruption of minors. But it is worth expressing an opinion that differs from the opinions of the liberal crowd - you are immediately subjected to harsh censorship. Such are the realities of today's "democratic" Europe: "freedom of expression" still remains its integral basis, but only if you express yourself "correctly".

https://ria.ru/20240729/evropa-1962525776.html

"The French government knows what it is doing. They wanted to show themselves as best as possible. They are demonstrating that there are no restrictions on freedom of expression."

Except if you support Putin or Russia.

They wanted to be open and inclusive and they ban Russian and Belarussian flags... how tolerant of them...

Not just Putin or Russia. If you don't support child genital mutilation, then you are not tolerated. Somehow it became normal without discussion
that it is justified to put children on hormone blockers to prevent puberty and resolve 80% of gender dysphoria. You see the victims of this
freak show on YouTube in de-transition videos. Children require adult guardians because they are not competent to make critical life decisions.
The only guardians that children should have are their parents. Not the state and not LGBTXYZ pedophile promoters.

The NATzO west has slid into the Sodom and Gomorrah mode on an accelerating trajectory. The rest of the world needs to unite to contain this
cancer.

Europe Prepares for Dark Times in America, by Gevorg Mirzayan for VZGLYAD. 08.03.2024.

Europe Prepares for Dark Times in America.

The European Union is creating a special group to prepare for the change of the US president. The Europeans are openly afraid of Donald Trump's return to the White House, as this is fraught with huge expenses for them. However, problems threaten Europe even if Kamala Harris wins in America.

Specially selected officials and experts will have to develop a strategy for the EU's behavior in the event of a "dramatic change in the American approach to European affairs." That is, if Donald Trump wins the presidential election in November.

It would seem that this is an absolutely logical move, given that European media regularly make alarmist statements about Trump, and the likelihood of his victory is assessed as high. The Republican candidate is positioned almost as the Antichrist, foreshadowing the collapse of transatlantic ties in the event of his return to the White House.

The problem here is not only the personality of the Republican candidate, but also who stands behind him.

"Trump himself is unpredictable. However, in addition to his personality, there is also a party aspect. Republicans are generally less inclined to take into account Europe's opinion than Democrats. And the EU traditionally has worse relations with Republican administrations," recalls Vadim Trukhachev, associate professor at the Russian State University for the Humanities.

The reason, in his opinion, is that the Republicans are imperialists, for whom the US is the real center of the universe, and the Democrats are globalists, inclined to recruit "assistants" in other countries. The European elites are also mostly globalists, so they are on the same wavelength with the Democrats.

In addition, the Republican Party has swung to the right: Trump represents the wing that is commonly called neo-isolationist, which calls for focusing primarily on solving domestic problems in the United States and allocating less money to foreign adventures.

Europe cannot appoint the right person as US president (as in Moldova, for example). "Nobody asks anything of the Europeans now. It is not a question of whether the Europeans can influence the outcome of the elections at all. They have only one option - to adapt," explains Dmitry Ofitserov-Belsky, senior research fellow at the IMEMO RAS.

Adaptation can be done at different levels. For example, at the national level, when each country will work according to the principle of "a drowning man must save himself". Some are already saving themselves this way.

"Many politicians in Europe have no contacts with Trump's entourage or Trump himself. That is why, for example, the Poles are going to allocate money to promote their interests through American media and lobbying structures. To position themselves as people with whom Trump can negotiate," says Ofitserov-Belsky.

Another option is to adapt at the level of the European Union as a whole, that is, to save ourselves together and look for methods by which Europe can collectively protect its interests from the Republican White House.

In particular, Donald Trump is going to reduce American participation in the Ukrainian conflict. This approach is unacceptable for Europe – European elites view the current conflict with Russia through an ideological prism and do not allow thoughts of losing. Therefore, they are preparing to take on a significant share of the costs of maintaining Ukraine.

"They are working on an option to support Kyiv without the US - with Britain, Canada and Norway. For this purpose, the EU is strengthening the military component," says Vadim Trukhachev.

It was no coincidence that the head of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, voiced the idea of ​​a European Defence Union. “EU member states will always be responsible for their troops, from doctrine to deployment,”  she said . The EC promises to present a detailed plan (the so-called “White Paper on the Future of European Defence”) at the end of autumn.

However, if Trump is ready not only to distance himself from the Kyiv regime, but also to seek compromises with Moscow, Europe will have to enter into conflict.

"They won't negotiate at Trump's request right away - they'll have to be bent. Washington has enough tools for this. The Americans can spend less on European bases, raise energy prices for Europeans, and even impose sanctions on European companies in the American market," Trukhachev continues.

Then Europe, in his opinion, will respond to Trump by working with the “Washington swamp,” the Democrats and “systemic Republicans,” using these tools not only to fight off pressure on the Ukrainian issue.

"We are talking about trade duties on European goods imported to the US, and about spending on weapons," says Dmitry Ofitserov-Belsky. According to the expert, Trump is connected with the military-industrial lobby and will demand that Europeans spend as much as possible on weapons. Moreover, European industry will not be able to meet the increased demands for American weapons.

The irony of the situation is that the task force will work not only on Ukraine and not only on Trump. It is being created, among other things, to analyze the consequences of Kamala Harris's possible move to the White House.

According to one version, it will be easier with her. "She is a complete novice in international affairs, and the Europeans will be able to manipulate her to some extent. This is especially true for the highly experienced new NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, who will work with her through the North Atlantic Alliance and, indirectly, the European Union," Vadim Trukhachev is confident.

In addition, Harris is a left-wing Democrat and globalist, belonging to the "Clinton clan." That is, practically "of the same blood" with the current EU leadership.

However, her inexperience and the presence of radical characters in the team could play a cruel joke on the European Union. The course of escalation in foreign policy and Ms. Harris's need to prove her "iron will" could plunge the collective West into a serious political crisis.

The European Union needs to calculate this scenario and understand how to get out of this crisis with minimal losses. So the group has something to work on.

https://vz.ru/world/2024/8/3/1280362.html

Degenerate U-rope considers any restoration of sanity in the USA to be "dark ages". F*ck off and die, vermin. Borrell's garden is a toilet of
depravity. The sane region is the "jungle".

Here’s who the EU is really afraid of (and it’s not Trump or Musk), by Rachel Marsden, a columnist, political strategist and host of independently produced talk-shows in French and English, for RT. 08.15.2024.

The biggest risk that Brussels faces after the pair’s fireside chat is that Europeans might start learning some inconvenient truths from each other.

When X owner Elon Musk announced a digital fireside chat on the app with former US president and current Republican frontrunner Donald Trump, at least one EU official promptly went ballistic.

EU Internal Markets Commissioner Thierry Breton reacted to the online promotion of the exclusive event with a threat – the kind of thing that goes over far better on an official company letterhead (the European Commission’s in this case) than, say, in a whispery, untraceable phone call.

“I am writing to you in the context of recent events in the United Kingdom and in relation to the planned broadcast on your platform X of a live conversation between a US presidential candidate and yourself, which will also be accessible to users in the EU,”, Breton wrote to Musk.

He warned the billionaire about ongoing compliance investigations and insisted on the need to mitigate “amplification of harmful content” which “if unaddressed might… generate detrimental effects on civic discourse and public security.”

Ah, yes. Because anything that goes against the official EU establishment narrative and agenda is generally considered to be a threat to public order. The plebs might actually discover some inconvenient realities that better explain why daily life in Europe has become more challenging than that of our gatekeeping overlords.

Worse, they may decide to do something about it, which presents an even greater inconvenience to the ruling establishment in that they may actually have to rework some of their policies to the detriment of some opaque special interests.

How fitting that Breton evoked the recent unrest in the UK, which wasn’t caused by an actual migrant but nonetheless sparked public outcry over migration and asylum issues – something that’s so “fake” that the British government itself has tried to hide the extent of the problem by stocking migrants on an offshore barge and proposing to send them to Rwanda.

Breton also CC’d X CEO Linda Yaccarino on his letter in the same way that a principal chewing out an unruly student in writing would also copy the kid’s mom so she could give him a good spanking at home. But Breton found out that getting mom onboard is hard to do when the “kid” in this case supports the whole household.

"This is an unprecedented attempt to stretch a law intended to apply in Europe to political activities in the US,” replied Yaccarino. “It also patronizes European citizens, suggesting they are incapable of listening to a conversation and drawing their own conclusions.”

Usually, when the EU is accused of foreign interference, it’s because it’s riding shotgun with Uncle Sam, who wasn’t around for backup this time when Musk himself fired back with a meme from the movie, Tropic Thunder – a still image of actor Tom Cruise in his role as a talent agent, captioned with the line, “Take a big step back and literally, f**k your own face!”

Chief editor of France Inter’s digital operations, Stephane Jourdain, cited European Commission sources who told him that Musk’s reply would be added to their files against X. Aye, aye, commissars!

Oh, but wait. It appears that Breton got out ahead of the EU clownmobile and is now about to get a deep back massage from the jalopy’s tire tracks. The European Commission “denied Breton had approval from its President Ursula von der Leyen to send the letter,” reported the Financial Times. Breton now knows exactly how every EU citizen feels when unelected “Queen Ursula” makes the same kind of top-down decisions for all Europeans as that which the unelected Breton just tried to unilaterally impose on Musk.

All this drama for what, exactly? The fact that Trump might say something that doesn’t jibe with the EU’s propaganda, which apparently is so tenuous and fragile that it needs to be preemptively protected from any potential future challenges, however rational or nutty?

It turns out that the EU didn’t have much to worry about. Trump doesn’t seem to have a clue about what’s actually going on here.

“They take great advantage of the United States in trade,” Trump said of Europe, which was goaded by the Biden administration into foregoing its trade relationship with Russia, whose cheap energy allowed it to compete with the US on the global playing field. It now has a greater dependence on pricier American liquified natural gas. And the trade deficit that the US has with the EU is largely the result of all the protectionist tariffs that it slaps on its other competitors, like China – an idea that Trump has long supported himself – leaving the US with fewer suppliers, like the EU. The US is doing a far better job of screwing itself than anyone else could.

“Why is the United States paying disproportionately more to defend Europe than Europe? That doesn’t make sense,” Trump said to Musk. “That’s unfair, and that is an appropriate thing to address.” Except that the US cash “for Ukraine” is mostly just being dumped into the US military industrial complex, which is actually a great deal for Washington cronies. And when the US demands that Europe spends more on weapons for itself, guess who the big winner is? “In the 2019-2023 period, 55% of imports to Europe were from the US, up from 35% in the 2014-2018 period,” French state media outlet, France 24, said of EU weapons.

As if the EU is going to clarify any of those Trump statements. If Brussels had to be honest, it’d be like, “Well, actually, Trump was spreading fake news when he said that we’re not paying enough for Ukraine. Our own arms industries are also starting to cash in on the charade now, too.”

The EU also probably won’t want to admit that it has become more dependent on the US for everything – including trade – despite the whole idea of breaking up with Russia having been in the interests of avoiding getting too committed to any one partner. Yet here’s Trump sounding like he has no clue why Brussels has become such a stage-five clinger that it needs the US to buy more of its stuff.

The more Trump blabs, the more the average European citizen can assess for themselves how much his reality jibes with theirs. And the more daylight that exists between them, the less influence Trump will have on them. Which is why it could actually serve the EU’s own agenda to let him talk as much as possible.

The downside, of course, is that open debate on anything EU-related evoked by Trump – even cluelessly – risks sparking an online public dissection of EU actions that would bleed into the more conventional media. And the danger there is that there is a high probability of EU politicians being outed as inept jokers.

https://www.rt.com/news/602614-trump-musk-eu-x/

Another right-wing election winner is sidelined in the EU, by Rachel Marsden, a columnist, political strategist and host of independently produced talk-shows in French and English, for RT. 10, 03.2024.

‘Populist’ these days simply means listening to what the people want, yet the Austrian leaders and media are trying to make it look borderline Nazi.

Another right-wing anti-establishment party has just won the popular vote in yet another European nation, this time the Austrian parliamentary elections. But as long as the establishment elites can still figure out how to keep themselves in power by clinging to one another despite their nominal ideological differences, they really don’t care. It sounds like a brilliant strategy. Let’s see where it goes, shall we?

The elites in Austria, like elsewhere in Europe, see it as their duty to defend democracy by ensuring that the party that gets the most votes gets completely sidelined. Why? Because, Hitler. Duh.

According to the Associated Press, Austria’s Freedom Party secured the “first far-right national election win since World War 2.” And we all know which famous Austrian is synonymous with the Second World War. How subtle.

“EU rocked as far-Right party founded by Nazi WW2 veterans storms to victory,” noted one British tabloid, the Express. “Herbert Kickl’s Freedom Party is on for a huge victory in Austria according to early projections.” Interesting how Nazi history is omitted entirely when Ukraine’s neo-Nazi Azov movement runs around with Nazi symbol flags and tattoos to kudos from the same establishment.

For those looking for a different way to smear Austrian voters other than comparing them to Hitler, there’s apparently also the opportunity here to compare them to the Führer’s World War 2 enemies: Russia. NBC is calling this “far-right” vote by average Austrians fed up with the establishment’s antics a “boost for Putin.”

Looks like all the “bad guy” bases are covered across the entire spectrum of Western establishment propaganda.

So how did this party actually win? The former Austrian minister who took the helm of the Freedom Party in 2021 constantly spoke of the average citizen suffering from an inability to pay for basic life necessities, like electricity and food. Doesn’t he understand that if Austrians are able to put food on the table, then Putin wins? Apparently not. And it doesn’t seem like voters get it either. And since this this guy and his party are increasingly resonating with voters’ objective reality while the elites dissociate from it, it’s translating into electoral wins.

It’s as simple as voters taking a look around at their lives and coming to the conclusion that his assessment aligns with their own more than the version presented by the establishment parties.

Another big issue for Austria has been the large number of refugees per capita, one of the highest in Europe, with the issue resonating through incidents like the Islamic State threats to the Taylor Swift concert in Vienna over the summer, police raids ahead of the anniversary of the September 11, 2001 terror attacks in the US, and refugee riots on Halloween a couple of years ago.

The asylum issue in particular is one that Kickl, the former interior minister who now leads the Freedom Party, would be well-positioned to tackle. What exactly about his past could possibly qualify him for that in the minds of voters? Maybe the fact that he was forced to step down from the job in 2019 for saying that he wanted to test the parameters of European human rights rules that “prevent us from doing what’s necessary” with asylum seekers – a subject that even the establishment left had to admit was an issue, but only saying that they’d merely reduce asylum applications. There’s considerable daylight between the positions of “we’re full” and “get out”, with the latter already being the actual position staked out by the so-called bleeding heart leftists, who only managed to get 21% of the vote.

Obviously a large number of Austrians didn’t clutch their pearls at Kickl’s remarks like the Austrian establishment did, awarding him nearly 29% of the popular vote. Kickl has called Ursula Von der Leyen, the unelected European Commission president, a warmonger. And, well, Austrian voters also handed his Freedom Party the most votes in the European parliamentary elections earlier this year. Nice little throne-warming gift, there.

The party’s mandate from voters seems clear: to take on the national and European establishments that have made such a mess of things. Just like everywhere else in Europe where anti-establishment parties have been surging, particularly on the right. So who are they going to form a government with, in respect of the people’s choice? According to the establishment-right chancellor, no one. Because, well, screw them.

“I have made it clear with whom it is not possible to form a responsible, sustainable government. The current leader of the FPO does not meet these criteria, so I excluded him,” Chancellor Karl Nehammer said. His own centre-right establishment party came in second with 26% of the vote, but coupled with the center-left, they can still cling to power.

All of the other Austrian parties have said that they’ll join the chancellor at his lunch table in the cafeteria and leave the Freedom Party alone in the corner like a Billy No Mates, because it’s not like this is supposed to be a democracy where the popular vote matters, or anything. The country’s president has also said that he doesn’t have to give the party with the most votes the first crack at forming a government. Guess he figured that he has to save democracy by placing it on a raft and watching it float away like Jack did with Rose in Titanic.

The chancellor apparently feels the need to protect the country from its own people. Just like French President Emmanuel Macron tried to do recently with electoral manipulations so numerous and exhausting that they could have been a new endurance sport at the Paris Olympic Games. It would have been straight up election-stealing collusion had it been done behind closed doors. They did it in full view of the public instead.

Macron pitched a fit when the populist right won the European vote, and called an election right afterwards that resulted in the populist right winning the popular vote and the populist left winning the most seats, thanks to Macron’s party’s deal with the left to withdraw strategically in favor of a single candidate between the two parties in districts where the right-wing National Rally risked winning as a result of vote splitting.

It turns out that Macron actually wanted neither party to actually form government, so he handed the role of Prime Minister to the EU’s Brexit negotiator, technocrat Michel Barnier, of the centre-right establishment party that was widely rejected by voters and reduced to single digits in the election. The new French government represents an attempt to represent populist right and left positions, but with ministers who aren’t actually from the parties that voters chose.

In recent German state elections, blocking the populist right, which won two of the three votes, has also been the name of the game for those who apparently consider the popular vote roadkill that can just be scraped off the wheels of their clown car before carrying on.

So what’s next for European democracy? How about just leaving the same establishment hacks in power in perpetuity and just having the plebes vote on an agenda for them to carry out. Because that’s almost where we’re at right now.

For the average European voter, it’s all about the economy, cost of living, migration, and knocking off all the bellicosity that’s enriching special interests while impoverishing the average citizen. A handful of politicians have figured it out. Because it really isn’t rocket science. “Populist,” these days just means having your eyes and ears open, which you can only do if your head isn’t jammed up Uncle Sam’s backside. Maybe – just maybe – that basic awareness is what’s so appealing to voters with these so-called far-right policies – and not, you know, Hitler.

https://www.rt.com/news/605111-eu-elites-shutting-out-anti-establishment-party/

Amusing that people who claim to support democracy are so acidic when it comes to what they call popularist politicians... who essentially get the vote of the majority and therefore have a legitimate right to govern.

Normally such people are defeated by all the minority groups all getting together or sharing votes to create a party with all the rest of the votes to beat the most popular party.

Look at France when loser politicians asked their supporters to vote for a politician to allow them to beat the most popular politician from the first round of votes.

A bit like Hilary claiming Trump won because not all Sanders supporters voted for her and those that voted for independent politicians like green party candidates could have voted for her to help her beat Trump and they didn't... because they don't want to vote for a bitch.

Ur-Fascism, or eternal fascism, is still around us, throughout the Twenty-First Century. It would be very comfortable for us if someone came out on the scene of the world to say: 'I want to reopen Auschwitz, I want the Blackshirts to parade again for the other Italians'! Unfortunately, life isn't so easy! Ur-Fascism may rise again in the most innocent garments. It is our duty to unmask it and point the finger at each of its new forms - every day, in every place of the world.
(Umberto Eco's Eternal Fascism on a free translation).

Bloomberg: Europe's decline becomes unstoppable, 10.14.2023.

The EU is finding it increasingly difficult to be on an equal footing with other great powers, and its economic model has no justification in current realities, according to the agency.

An unfavorable political and economic environment could put an end to the European Union's aspirations to become an independent world power, Bloomberg notes.

The agency notes that the region's leaders are suddenly faced with a barrage of evidence that "the decline is becoming unstoppable." The media cites as examples the new right-wing government in France, the closure of Volkswagen plants in Germany and the refusal of large IT companies to launch new AI projects in Europe due to the regulatory environment.

"All these developments underpin the EU's inability to act as a cohesive and dynamic economic bloc, eroding its status and degrading its ability to respond to a wide range of threats," the publication notes. The agency indicates that the largest members of the EU are burdened with "economic models that have failed for too long" and "restless voters who do not accept alternatives."

It is noted that, despite a number of internal problems, the United States and China have systems that greatly centralize decision-making and generate huge amounts of private or public capital for defense and investment in advanced technology. "Europe has none of these advantages, and that is becoming increasingly evident," the author of the article adds.

"Some countries could benefit from trade or investment agreements with the United States, China or Russia. But the longer the current trends persist, the greater Europe's vulnerability to dramatic crises will become," Bloomberg notes.

Yandex Translate from Spanish.

https://actualidad.rt.com/actualidad/526449-bloomberg-decadencia-europa-hacer-imparable

The EU doesn’t need Moscow to interfere in its democracy – it has Brussels for that, by Rachel Marsden for RT. 10.22.2024.

Instead of trying to pin down Russia as the main threat to democracy, perhaps the bloc’s officials should look in the mirror.

The EU superheroes did it, guys. They stopped Russian President Vladimir Putin from being elected to Brussels. And now they’re telling us all about how they did it, before Marvel Studios’ costume department comes knocking on the door of the EU clown tent to ask for their capes back.

The Russians and their “disinformation” didn’t have any impact on the European Elections earlier this year. That’s now the official word from the EU itself.

Vera Jourova, the Vice President of the European Commission for Values and Transparency, has emerged from an Orwellian novel to announce that “based on currently available information, no major information interference operation capable of disrupting the elections was recorded.”

So much for the public freak out that European parliamentarians were having back in April 2024, demanding even more censorship of “Kremlin-backed media outlets” and “disinformation campaigns” in what they qualified as “Kremlin-backed attempts to interfere with and undermine European democratic processes.”

We’re supposed to believe that it’s all because Jourova had embarked on a crackdown, er, “Democracy Tour” to commiserate not just with election officials and authorities, but also with “civil society” NGOs, industry, and media. Surely it has nothing to do with the fact that there wasn’t really much disinformation to begin with and that they’ve been blowing the issue way out of proportion.

Jourova herself acknowledged that even the EU’s Digital Media Observatory was only able to find between 4% to 8% of what they qualify as “disinformation” among all articles analyzed between May 2023 and March 2024, and that the figure climbed to just 15% in May 2024, right before the EU’s June election.

This means that around EU election time, a whopping 85% of information and analysis floating around in the public domain was EU-approved. Jourova said that “disinformation narratives followed the topics we expected: there were allegations that the elections are rigged, but mostly topics that trigger a strong emotional impact – the war on Ukraine, the Middle East, false narratives on climate change, and migrants.” We used to call those things topics of debate. But that was before they decided that the agendas Brussels was trying to ram down everyone’s throats across the entire bloc wouldn’t be served by messy democratic dissent. Best to just dismiss, marginalize, or censor opposing information and narratives and be forced to deal with being violently mugged by reality later on issues like Ukraine’s not actually “winning,” regardless of how expensive life has become for EU citizens as a result of the bloc’s suicidal pro-Ukraine policies, and migration being an actual five-alarm problem for the EU as it faces the palpable rise of populism backlash for not doing enough earlier.

And the EU elections are certainly not rigged! The people elect representatives to EU parliament, then a ‘president’ is handpicked behind closed doors and plopped in front of them for a simple yes/no confirmation vote. That person, currently ‘Queen’ Ursula von der Leyen, who has never actually been elected to the EU parliament, then runs a ‘royal’ European Commission of bureaucratic desk jockeys that crafts and dictates policy for the entire bloc. Anyone calling this anything other than a model democratic institution must be a Russian agent.

A quick trip to the European Digital Media Observatory’s website, and a random click on an article, finds that it qualifies Ukrainian fake news, like the nonsense story about the ‘Ghost of Kyiv’ fighter pilot who was downing Russian jets left and right at the outset of the conflict, as “soft propaganda” necessary to rally Ukrainian troops and allies – unlike Russia’s “hard propaganda.” And what might that be, exactly? The same analysis includes an obviously satirical cartoon caricature of Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky and points out that, no, Zelensky did not actually emerge as a cartoon from a hole in the streets of Paris with paper money and gold bars flying into his mouth. They even included a photo of the actual “real” Parisian street, before someone photoshopped in the cartoon Zelensky, to prove that Russia was spreading lies. “Sometimes, it requires thinking outside of the box, using geolocation methods or contacting fact-checkers or sources on the field, such as Myth Detector in Georgia, to debunk a fabricated caricature of president Zelensky in Paris,” the intrepid EU fact-checkers say of their work in protecting Europeans from laughing their posterior off, at least until they visit the observatory’s website.

Jourova credited the Democracy Action Plan of 2020, meant to bolster by both “strengthening media freedom” and “countering disinformation.” Nothing says freedom and democracy like institutional powers deciding what information should be free and what should be censored into oblivion.

The EU is starting to resemble a casino in Las Vegas: the house always wins, regardless of who voters actually send there. And the current establishment status quo is doing everything to ensure the perpetuation of the same system, including defining censorship as necessary to save democracy and freedom as adherence to their agenda.

Maybe if they chilled out a bit more and loosened their iron grip, then not only would dissent perhaps enable better decisions that would win voter support, but it would also take the wind out of the sails of populist parties who are surging in EU and national elections largely because voters are looking to elect people who are about as far away as possible from the establishment’s current blast radius.

A lot of good all this EU censorship and information meddling did for the establishment’s cause in actual EU voting, though, with anti-establishment parties continuing to make gains. Not quite enough to book the result entirely on Russia quite yet, as the US establishment tried to do when Donald Trump won in 2016. But watch out for what happens in future Western elections, particularly this November in the US. If establishment darling Kamala Harris wins, it’ll be yet another victory for election security. If populist favorite Trump wins, get ready for it to be Russia’s fault. Because they’re looking everywhere for meddling except in the mirror.

https://www.rt.com/news/606027-russia-eu-brussels-election-interference/

They are not looking at their actual position, they are making up problems and blaming Russia and Putin for them... in such a situation your condition only gets worse with time because the treatment is for a different problem to what you have.

The west has multiple gunshot wounds to their own feet and legs and those shots were self inflicted and they are blaming Russia and Putin for that.

Anyone who points out the problem is Putins puppet so no one is going to stop the bleeding... reelecting idiots to continue their work just ensures the outcome for the patient and the continued suffering of the actual patient... the people of the EU.

Just looking at progress and development in Russia and new Russian territories, how long before the people in the EU start voting against the idiots that got them in this situation.

Many western historians wondered why the majority of Germans supported Hitler and didn't believe all the stories about concentration camps till they were taken to them by allied soldiers... well now you know... when your own media and politicians keep telling you lies and block and ban all alternative views from any sources then most people end up thinking what they are told to think. They didn't have the advantage of the internet or 200 satellite TV channels to check other views but the vast majority don't trust them anyway.

Look at Georgia and Moldova and Ukraine and tell me it is Putin that is corrupting Democracy on his borders.

The facts of the matter is that these regions are being corrupted by western influences and in the case of the Ukraine destroyed by them because of their choices to cancel Russia and its language and culture and religion... how is that even remotely democratic?

And the dictator Putin has not banned the English language or western religions or western culture in Russia.

Spain paid Ukraine with the lives of its citizens, by Elena Karaeva for RiaNovosti. 11.03.2024.

The heartbreaking scenes in Valencia, where ordinary people tried to save people drowning in muddy and powerful torrents of rain (but not always successfully), did not change the rhetoric, tone or work schedule of the top bureaucracy in Brussels and Madrid. Nor did the news that the massive flood that hit the Mediterranean port of Valencia had killed more than 200 people.

If anything can serve as an illustration of the irresponsibility of not only national (Madrid, King Felipe VI and the cabinet of ministers of Pedro Sanchez) but also supranational (the European Commission) authorities, it is natural disasters or epidemics.

Five years ago, the wave of coronavirus infections that hit Spain, one of the first countries in the pan-European bloc, showed us the same picture. The Cabinet and its head, having ineptly failed at everything that could be failed, are still at the helm, and no one will ever dare to question their professional competence. Almost 122 thousand people paid with their lives for the government's inability to respond accurately and quickly.

The current extreme weather situation on the Spanish coast could have happened in any EU country and with practically the same result: every time an unconventional decision needs to be made, a tough political move needs to be made, the European ruling elites run from responsibility like the devil from incense. They know in advance that nothing will happen to them for this. But for showing initiative, even if it means saving the lives of the Europeans themselves, you can get a slap on the wrist.

It is funny to listen to the justifications of the Spanish Prime Minister, who blames the regional government for the "late notification of the population of Valencia" because "that is the law". No less funny are the statements of the President of the European Commission, who, taking advantage of the opportunity, immediately recalled the importance of the "environmental agenda", as well as the "fight against climate change". Von der Leyen said that the EU "is ready to make the data of the Copernicus programme available to Spain". Without going into details.

We will do the work for the President of the European Commission and provide details.

When the authorities of any European country say that rains/snow/floods/fires "caught the nation by surprise", they are lying.

The Copernicus programme mentioned by von der Leyen is nothing more than a powerful chain of satellites collecting all weather data 24/7/365, selling the information to clients or, under contract, compiling long-term or short-term weather forecasts for them based on mathematical analysis. The Spanish authorities' words about the "unpredictable nature of weather cataclysms" and the Copernicus motto of keeping an eye on the Earth contradict each other.

But it is not only the Copernicus programme that provides (or does it not?) data on possible natural disasters. The North Atlantic Alliance, of which Spain has been a member since 1982, also has a meteorological service. It is so important that in the NATO structure it is listed among military agencies, immediately after electronic warfare, but before the department that deals with military oceanography.

The Spanish or non-Spanish authorities and the Brussels bureaucracy that complements them all are a community that is not only not responsible for the safety and well-being of those they administer. These characters actively pedal - directly or indirectly - the idea that there are no dangers for its inhabitants in the "Garden of Eden". In fact, this is the quintessence of the "European dream" that the EU managed to foist on Kyiv.

And here, regardless of whether we like it or not, financial support for Ukraine bursts into the spotlight, which Madrid provided to Kyiv almost immediately after the start of our SVO.

In total, it is billions and billions of euros. Military equipment, ammunition for it, and so on. All this is the money of Spanish taxpayers. The funds were not borrowed on international financial markets, but taken from the treasury.

When Spanish Prime Minister Sanchez accuses the regional Valencian authorities of being late with the "alert on the level of threat", he unwittingly says that he is absolving himself of responsibility for what happened, but not only that. The head of the Cabinet of Ministers of the Iberian Kingdom also reproaches the local administration in this way for "sparing money". The second circumstance is the most important. A weather warning and a weather threat always cost a tidy sum in euros. Since they involve putting the relevant emergency services on alert. Spending, spending and spending. This is how such mechanisms work in the EU.

And if the regions do not have the means to notify and carry out subsequent rescue operations, it is possible (and necessary) to honestly admit today that these regions would hardly refuse extra hundreds of millions of euros. But the extra money has already been given to Kyiv.

Simple arithmetic, but no one in the EU will mention it today, of course. Because it is much easier to adapt to the general EU sanctions campaign (against Russia) than to make decisions that allow saving the lives of their own voters and taxpayers.

https://ria.ru/20241103/ispaniya-1981590728.html

The Last Bullet: A Bracelet for Le Pen and the Banning of "Alternative", by Pëtr Akopov for RiaNovosti. 11.16.2024.

Europe is looking for an answer to Trump's victory: once again there are loud statements about the need for unity, strengthening sovereignty, and in general, once again "it's time to take our destiny into our own hands." All this is very pompous - and completely meaningless.

And it is not even that the current continental elites, who have placed their bets on the integration of Europe , do not have the will and strategic thinking to defend its interests, and instead of serving someone else's geopolitical project (Anglo-Saxon) and deepening the confrontation with Russia . Yes, they themselves can no longer change, but theoretically they could give way to those who advocate a change of course, for real European "strategic autonomy". But they do not want this either, and in their attempts to stop the course of history they resort to completely losing methods.

Right now, in two leading European countries, there are calls to ban the main opposition force - yes, to simply ban it from participating in elections. So as not to risk that in the next (or a little later) elections this force would come to power - or would not become so strong that it would be impossible to form a government without it.

We are talking about France and Germany: in the first, the court wants to deprive Marine Le Pen of the right to put forward her candidacy, and in the second, Bundestag deputies are asking their colleagues to begin the procedure of banning the Alternative for Germany, the second most popular party in the country. Everything is as democratic as possible, as it should be in the postmodern era.

Le Pen and her party comrades are accused of embezzling three million euros – not now, but between 2004 and 2016, when they hired assistants as MEPs who were paid from the budget of the pan-European parliament. And they worked mainly for the National Front party – and now Le Pen faces five years in prison for this. No, she will not spend them in a cell – three years probation, and two with an electronic bracelet, but she will lose the right to run in the 2027 presidential elections. And this will be her fourth election – and her chances of winning them are really high.

The case of "misuse" has been dragging on for eight years, but it is now nearing its end, which is why the prosecutor's demands have appeared. And the most surprising thing about them is that the court is asked to pass a sentence under a special "preliminary execution" procedure, that is, so that the ban on running for five years would come into effect immediately, without waiting for the results of the appeal of the sentence. Everything is sewn with white thread: it can take many years to consider the appeals, and the presidential elections in France are in 2.5 years - we need to hurry.

It is difficult to predict whether the French court will issue such an overtly political verdict: for now, it looks more like part of a campaign to intimidate Le Pen. However, if in a few months she is indeed banned from running for five years, this will not stop her party from taking power. In the 2027 elections, the party will nominate its current leader, Jordan Bardella – he will be only 31 years old, but there has long been no age limit for the president of the republic. The coming to power of the National Rally will change France and Europe – and will accelerate the process of changing the party system in Germany.

In which the parties are now preparing for early elections to the Bundestag, and following their results there will be a change of the ruling coalition and the chancellor. The new chancellor Merz will take the current chancellor Scholz as his junior partner in the SPD - because only these two (previously considered "people's") parties together will have enough votes to form a majority: in the best of times, each of them created a coalition for itself. The main opposition to the new government will be the "Alternative for Germany" - it will definitely have the largest faction.

If, of course, it gets into the Bundestag at all - because recently members of parliament appealed to their colleagues with a call to begin the procedure of banning the AfD. They say that otherwise our liberal democracy will be under threat, as one of the authors of the appeal, a member of parliament from the CDU , stated . The petition was signed by 112 members of parliament (out of 733) - mainly representatives of the Green Party, the CDU and the Left. Officially, the future ruling party - the CDU - does not support this initiative, so there is no chance of even starting it (that is, a vote by the majority of members of the Bundestag for an appeal to the Constitutional Court). But the touchstone has been cast.

There have long been demands in Germany to ban AfD, and in three East German states its branches have already been declared extremist, which allows them to be monitored. But there has never been such a blatant attack on the party, and from parties that are losing votes (the Greens and the Left). To declare unconstitutional and ban a party that is supported by every fifth German (and every fourth at the peak of its popularity) is a clear overkill. Moreover, such a ban would be suicidal not only for the German party system, but would also accelerate the crisis of the entire political model of the FRG. It is simply impossible to ban AfD without serious consequences for all of German politics - the banned party will be reborn under a new name and become even more popular. It is already clear that, despite all the differences between the German and French political systems, AfD is following the path of the "National Front", that is, from the position of the main opposition force to the position of the most popular party in the country.

This process can be slowed down, but it cannot be stopped. And attempts to ban it, that is, using openly anti-democratic methods, will only accelerate the growth of popularity of anti-elite forces. And shorten their path to power.

https://ria.ru/20241116/frantsiya-1984082951.html

The EU is looking for a recipe for salvation, by Elena Karaeva for RiaNovosti. 11.18.2024.

At the moment when the servants and majordomos of our proxy and direct opponents were packing their masters' things in suitcases so that they would look spick and span when they arrived in Brussels "on the morning horse," our aviation was carrying out combat sorties. According to the Defense Ministry's summary , strikes were carried out on "the infrastructure of military airfields, gas production and energy facilities operating for the Ukrainian Armed Forces, a drone depot, and concentrations of enemy manpower and equipment in 144 districts."

If we were to summarize in one paragraph the complete and final failure of Western economic, military and political doctrines, which aimed to inflict a strategic defeat on our country, then here it is, the summary.

Some servants are collecting luggage, while others are fighting for the right to survive and preserve the country, state and nation.

Today in Brussels, where the heads of diplomatic departments of the 27 countries of the bloc are meeting, they will once again try to find a new "Macropolus remedy" (the recipe, due to age, like the ingredients, has gone bad) in order to destroy us once again.

Destroy quickly - the clock is ticking in the heads of all those sitting. How can they succeed in implementing their plans before January 20th. And how can they adjust more accurately and quickly. But already under the next administration.

For now they are putting on airs and pretending that everything is fine with them, and disagreements are being settled as a result of "fruitful discussions" within the framework of a strictly "democratic debate." However, the disputants occasionally let things slip. Their current dialogue is the penultimate, if not the last. And it is not about the results of the year, and not about "strengthening Ukraine's negotiating positions" in possible consultations with us (this was stated by the Polish Minister of Foreign Affairs), but about analyzing the options for a Russian response to the theft of our assets (now they are only cutting and stealing coupons from deposits) and understanding how much a hypothetical permission from Paris for Kiev to use long-range SCALP to shell our territory would cost.

Without illusions and bias - if the change in the vector of American policy has already been accepted by everyone, albeit not without hysteria, then the EU members are still afraid (under the strict gaze of von der Leyen and Charles Michel and Josep Borrell, who have joined her) to crawl away from Ukraine.

Almost all those who have gathered in Brussels today have a clearly articulated interest in escalating the geopolitical crisis. The confrontation with Russia today for the Europeans, who have long since grown hawk feathers, is a question of their political survival. As soon as the conflict subsides, they will have to do what they fear most. Namely: answer for what they have done.

All these people in grey, who invested their guts into the war with us and, naturally, expected generous dividends, do not want and, most importantly, cannot admit reality. In their political arsenals there are no more scarecrows for the population they administer, unless it is the hackneyed "Russia threatens us, and Ukraine is our outpost in the matter of protecting freedom and democracy."

In the discourse of the most stubborn pseudo-hawks (the winged predator independently chooses whom to hunt, while political pseudo-hawks have been and are now obliged to communicate with Washington on every occasion) passages about freedom and democracy look like pure mockery. Former European Commissioner Thierry Breton (who, among other things, was involved in organizing the production of the promised million shells for Ukraine, but unsuccessfully) stated that "in Brussels it was not allowed to talk about ending the conflict in Ukraine", and added: "The European Union has no independent opportunity to discuss negotiations on ending the conflict".

If the former European Commissioner is not lying, is not inflating his value, if the illusory air of freedom has not played a cruel joke on him, then it turns out that everything, absolutely everything - from the first to the last word in the assessment and designation of the EU position, given at the beginning of our special operation by both the Kremlin and the Foreign Ministry - corresponded to reality.

The European Union, according to Breton, by making decisions that are suicidal for itself, by introducing sanctions, turning a blind eye to the terrorist attacks against the Nord Stream, by putting millions of Ukrainian displaced persons on the necks of its own taxpayers, has given its sovereignty to the United States.

There will be no need to sum up the results of the current gathering, since everything that was declared in Brussels, everything that was decided, everything that everyone agreed with, will be sent to Washington for approval. There, the lame administration will wave the sheets of paper covered with writing, and, having passed them through a paper shredder, will flush them down the drain.

This is how the value and significance of a pan-European position is determined on the other side of the Atlantic. But for us, as has been said, "it is pointless to threaten. Threats only encourage us."

We won't be stocking up on popcorn while waiting for the show to end in this big top either. We have plenty to do in our big house. There's still a lot of work to do in the special operation zone.

Well, if it comes to the conclusion that the burial shroud, which the European Union will sooner or later have to wrap itself in to crawl to the cemetery, can be turned into a white flag, our relevant structures will register this petition for capitulation. It will be considered on a general basis.

https://ria.ru/20241118/evropa-1984272180.html

Quarrel with Russia forces EU to betray France's interests for Germany's, by Valeria Verbinina for VZGLYAD. 11.19.2024.

The EU is trying to mitigate the far-reaching consequences of the severing of economic ties with Russia. To this end, Brussels is ready to conclude an epochal trade agreement with Latin America. What is at stake – and why will the new agreement be in Germany’s interests, but ultimately destroy an entire sector of the French economy?

By the end of the year, the EU authorities intend to sign a free trade agreement with the so-called MERCOSUR, an economic alliance of Latin American countries that includes Brazil and Argentina. It would seem that in its current position, the EU should consider such an agreement a success. With the Russian markets closed and the industrial goods sales crisis underway, the EU will find a new market for them.

The problem is that it works both ways. And while Europe can count on its industrial products to be in demand in the new market, things are not so good with agriculture.

The average cost of agricultural production in the EU is much higher than in South America. This means that if the agreement is signed, cheap products from overseas will flood European markets. As a result, the EU's own agriculture will be in crisis, and unemployment in this sector will skyrocket. And the first producer of agricultural products in the EU - France - will have a particularly hard time.

The matter is further complicated by the fact that America has just elected Trump. The former and future US president has made it clear that he will exert economic pressure on Europe as well. Protective duties? Additional taxes? Direct and indirect bans? As many as you like: Trump is a businessman, and he knows the laws of business very well. And in this case, he himself will be establishing them, deciding who can trade in America and who cannot.

Where should the poor European Union go, having lost Russian markets, cheap energy in the form of Russian gas, and in addition got involved in the Ukrainian conflict, either allowing or not to strike with its weapons on Russian territory? The European market itself has long been divided, there can be nothing new in Asia and Africa, America under Trump will be lost, and it needs to sell its products somewhere.

So the free trade agreement with Mercosur, which theoretically creates a common market of 700 million consumers, is a lifesaver for the EU. Yes, European agriculture will suffer, but industry will benefit.


However, since the European Union is a very elastic concept, the industry is different in its various parts. For example, Germany, having weighed all the pros and cons, made a bet on signing the agreement, deciding that its advantages would outweigh the disadvantages. It can be considered that it is Germany and its industrial lobby that is the driving force behind this agreement. Counting on the agreement to save the German auto industry, which has recently been experiencing a colossal crisis.

France is a different matter: after carefully considering the issue, the government decided that they do not need the agreement and that it could only harm the country's economy. "France is against this agreement," said President Emmanuel Macron, who just flew to Argentina to talk with its new president, Javier Miley. "We say no to this agreement," echoed Prime Minister Michel Barnier.

But the fate of France is decided in Brussels, since France is just part of the European Union.


And although the free trade agreement has been discussed for 25 years, it is believed that now is the moment when things will move forward. Simply because the EU has virtually nowhere to go: take what they give it.

The agreement is expected to abolish more than 90% of existing customs duties on numerous products, including cars and medicines. Taxation will also be abolished for certain volumes of products imported into the EU. For example, this will affect sugar (180 thousand tons per year), poultry (100 thousand tons per year), beef (99 thousand tons per year), rice (60 thousand tons per year).

Europeans will be able to import wine, chocolate, cookies, cheese, and, for example, soda, duty-free into Latin America. Although it is not a fact that the local population will stop buying their cheap cheeses and exchange them for expensive French ones: in addition to the difference in cost, no one has cancelled the costs of logistics.

Deciding, as the French proverb goes, that the game was not worth the candle, Macron began looking for allies who could help block the signing of the agreement.


For this to happen, at least four EU members must vote against the agreement, but that is not all. The countries that protest the law must represent more than 35% of the EU population. So it is not enough to put pressure on Malta, Cyprus and Luxembourg to achieve their goal. The French authorities tried to win over Poland and counted on Austria's displeasure, but it seems that in the end they preferred to take a more cautious stance.

France will have a second chance to block the agreement in the European Parliament, which will have to approve the signed document. According to MEP Pascal Canfen, "France must look for allies in order to block the adoption of the agreement." According to him, French MEPs are practically united against the agreement, but it is also necessary to attract MEPs from other countries to their side.

The coming weeks promise to be heated in Europe, where agricultural workers are determined to defend their rights. This is not limited to France, where unions are calling for protests. As a German union notes , “the agreement must be renegotiated… it will lead to domestic products being replaced by imports produced according to last century standards, to the detriment of consumers.”

The European Union, not without reason, points out that in Latin America they adhere to less strict food standards, while in the EU itself they are becoming more and more draconian. It turns out to be a strange thing - on the one hand, they demand more and more from their own, and on the other - they easily sacrifice them for the sake of yet another momentary benefit.

In Spain, attitudes towards the agreement are mixed – meat producers do not like it, but winemakers and olive oil producers, on the contrary, believe that it will be beneficial to them. In Holland, the prospect of signing it has alarmed sugar and poultry producers. Poland, Austria, Ireland – everywhere the upcoming agreement is causing concern. In Italy, Agriculture Minister Francesco Lollobrigida spoke out against concluding the agreement “in its current form” and called for its terms to be reviewed.

The French were the first to take action and began to block roads and bridges across France in protest.


So far everything is happening quite friendly, with warnings and recommendations on how to avoid problem areas, but this is only the beginning.

Another question is whether these protests will change anything – and here the answer will most likely be negative. Europe – and Germany in particular – desperately needs new markets, otherwise the current economic downturn risks turning into a full-scale crisis. French agriculture will be sacrificed for the sake of the survival of German automobile concerns. And all because the shock consequences of the severance of economic ties with Russia have begun to reach Europe – after all, up until this point, both French agriculture and the German auto industry were doing more than well.

https://vz.ru/world/2024/11/19/1298672.html