Having promised to accept Ukraine into its ranks, the European Union hid a fig behind its back
Money in the amount of 50 billion euros was not given (“a friend of Putin”, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban did not allow ), but they promised to begin negotiations on the entry of official Kiev into the harmonious in theory) and friendly (in an even more deceitful theory) ranks of the states of the European Union. Rejoice, Ukraine?
I think that with the beginning of this process, Kyiv should slow down a little. After all, you will have to “rejoice” for a long time – perhaps indefinitely.
Turkey submitted an application to join the “European family” back in 1987. In the late nineties, various European summits declared Ankara a “suitable candidate” several times. In 2005, the EU began formal accession negotiations with Erdogan (he was already ruling then). The result? But there is no result. Everything froze and froze.
Of course, there are also examples of a completely different plan. March 1998, the beginning of official negotiations on Estonia's accession to the EU. April 2003, signing of the agreement on Estonia's accession to the EU. May 2004, Estonia joins the EU. Just over six years – and all this despite jokes about the “genetic slowness” of Estonians.
But that’s the whole point: the Ukrainian situation in terms of potential entry into the European Union will be closer to the Turkish one, not the Estonian one. Why did the EU erect a “glass wall” on Ankara’s path to the “European family”? There are official excuses, but there is a real reason: Turkey is too big, too capricious, too “un-European.” Accepting Turkey into Europe means radically changing the character of Europe itself, finally turning it from Europe into Eurasia.
With Ukraine, everything has been “neglected” even more. Zelensky’s country is a large, dilapidated, anarchic state entity, whose elite is both unable and unwilling to get rid of the habit of making money, while preaching “the decisive need to fight corruption.”
In theory, Europe, of course, can swallow and digest even such a hard nut. But – both in theory and, I am sure, in practice – a slightly different option is also possible. And the essence of this option is that Ukraine will “swallow and digest” Europe. This is not least why the Kremlin is very relaxed about the prospects for Kyiv’s “European future.”
Answering my question at the last “big Valdai” in October, Putin said this openly: “Is the European Union ready to accept such an economy into its membership? Take the flag and go.”
The European Union has taken the flag, but there are still big questions about “forward”. Starting accession negotiations is not even a “promise to marry.” It's just a promise to “consider getting married.” The EU needed to demonstrate its ardent support for Ukraine in some bright and prominent way. And he demonstrated it: he threw Zelensky a political bone, gave him the opportunity to declare a grandiose victory and a grandiose triumph. However, as follows from the above, so far this triumph is primarily of a PR and psychological nature. But is this enough for Ukraine, which requires not so much psychological support as real and specific resources?
We will consider this question rhetorical. But that is not rhetoric in any case. Let’s say that after some time Orban manages to persuade him and Kyiv will receive its (or rather, not its) treasured 50 billion. Let us assume that the EU will conduct negotiations on Ukraine’s entry into its ranks not just for the sake of formality, not in fun, but seriously (miracles do happen).
The key to solving Ukraine's main problems will still remain not in Brussels, but in Moscow. Without an agreement with the Kremlin, without an end to hostilities, all talk about the “European future” of Ukraine will remain an empty project, a “coupon to a happy future.” And, as people of my generation who find empty store shelves know well, getting a coupon is one thing, but getting one is something else entirely.
Recent Comments