Yesterday by a majority of votes in PACE, a resolution was adopted, in which for the first time since 2014 Russia is called upon to form its delegation and pay a contribution to the Council of Europe budget. We are talking about an impressive amount of about € 60 million. At the same time, it was not without the “Crimean Question”. The resolution once again recalls the "illegal annexation" of the peninsula, which "violates international law and the Charter of the Council of Europe." It is also questionable whether the noble EU countries are planning to return the right to vote to Russia.

The signal is twofold: we do not want to part, especially when it comes to millions of euros, but give the Crimea. For this approach, there is a good Russian saying about a fish, a frying pan and something else there. But this is the lyrics.

The key question is: why are the PACE so perplexed about the possible exclusion of Russia? Yes, at the end of June 2019 there will be two years, as Moscow refused to pay contributions. But even though we were one of the main contributors to the CE budget, of course, it’s not about the money. After five years, some EU countries came to understand that the total exclusion of Russia is fraught with excessive pressure from the States.

This is particularly recognized by countries such as Germany and Austria, which the US shamelessly beat on the nose for the very same Nord Stream 2. Remember how, in early 2019, the American ambassador to Germany, Richard Grenell, sent letters threatening sanctions to German companies? And the logic of Washington is clear: if Germany in 2014 came to the throat of its own interests and joined the anti-Russian front, then why should it be any different now?

But what particularly scared the pragmatic Germans was the US attempts to drag them into questionable provocations in the Kerch Strait.

And for what? To help all the same Ukraine, from which the EU has achieved nothing but an uncontrolled flow of migrants? The prospect is so-so, especially since the provocation could have unpredictable results.

“What are you suggesting to fight Germany, Madam Minister? - In early March, Merkel was accountable to German Defense Minister Ursula von der Lyayen for having offered to assist the States in their design. “Why should we neglect the interests of Germany for the sake of the interests of the United States?”

All this, of course, was transmitted from mouth to mouth on Facebook with reference to Israeli political analyst Solomon Mann. But, as time has shown, the German ships really decided to bypass the Kerch Strait.

The danger of Russia's exclusion from European structures is also recognized in Serbia, especially against the background of recent events: protests with painfully familiar slogans “It's finished with it”.

Doubtful meetings of the local opposition with overseas technologists over a cup of US, intrusive talk about the country's voluntary-compulsory entry into NATO - into that alliance that in 1999 generously bombed (including Serbs) radioactive bombs.

It is not surprising that the Serbian deputy Alexander Seselj during his speech at PACE reminded the audience that “there is no Europe without Russia” and that it is time to start respecting the territorial integrity of this Russia itself, recognizing the Crimea behind it. It is significant that if at the January session the deputies tried to stifle Seselj with shouts and noises, this time his speech was held in complete silence.

The European Union is tired of war with Russia, especially since over the years this war is moving more and more obviously from the informational and economic plane to a hotter phase. Well still provocations in the Azov-Black Sea region. And what if the freezing of the DISMD leads to global consequences? What will prevent the States with the same stubbornness as they are trying to kill the Nord Stream 2 and insist on deploying their missiles in Europe?

In the name of the most notorious "containment" of Russia, which more closely resembles an offensive against Russia. That is why now in many European countries there is a request for a revision of the anti-Russian position. The first signals of readiness to resume the dialogue go through PACE, but so far this “message” stands for “pay silently”. Would Russia agree to such a proposal?

Hardly. And this was clearly articulated by the head of the Russian delegation to the PACE, Leonid Slutsky: “The resolution can be a positive step of the assembly towards Russia, but its adoption does not mean that we rush back to PACE tomorrow. I would say this is a new window of opportunity to overcome the crisis. ”

According to Slutsky, the creation of a special structure, which provides for a mechanism where decisions are transferred to the Council of Europe Committee of Ministers, can play a positive role. The key for Moscow remains the introduction of an amendment to the regulations prohibiting to deprive national delegations of the right to vote during the sessions: “We do not cancel our conditions”.

In other words, if the European Union aims to preserve the balance of power of global players, it will have to go to the demands of Russia. Otherwise, the “geopolitical consequences” will affect not only Russians, but also Europeans.

The point of view of the author may not coincide with the position of the editorial board.