Europe intends to impose sanctions against Russia over the Navalny case.

These sanctions can aggravate Russian-European relations, but they can also, oddly enough, lead to the solution of a number of problems in them.

Navalniada continues to occupy the languages ​​and minds of Western politicians.

After the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons found poisonous substances in the blood and urine of Alexei Navalny (which were not there at the time of Navalny's transportation from Omsk), Europe regarded this find as unequivocal evidence of the politician's poisoning with weapons of mass destruction in Russia.

Of course, the next logical step would be to send Alexei Navalny to European military laboratories - after all, if scientists understand how Navalny's body could not first die from Novichok within a matter of minutes after the poisoning, and then recover as soon as possible (recall that from the moment defeat with a deadly poison before full discharge from the hospital took only 32 days), then chemical weapons will turn into useless trash.

And this is a pure Nobel Prize!

But, unfortunately, Europeans do not think quite logically.

Therefore, immediately after the OPCW's verdict, Paris and Berlin announced their readiness to impose sanctions against Moscow - for the alleged use of chemical weapons against Navalny.

“France and Germany have repeatedly called on Russia to shed light on the circumstances of this crime and on those who committed it.

Russia has not yet provided a convincing explanation.

In this context, we believe that there is no other plausible explanation for the poisoning of Mr. Navalny other than Russia's responsibility and involvement.

Drawing all the conclusions from this observation, France and Germany will send their European partners proposals for additional sanctions.

These proposals will target people we believe are responsible for this crime and this violation of international standards because of their official functions, as well as those involved in the Novice program, the French foreign ministry said in a statement.

The call for the imposition of sanctions has already been supported in London, which staged the Skripaliada in European theaters (and, by the way, which made it an order of magnitude more professional - German scriptwriters should learn from their British colleagues).

The Netherlands also spoke in favor of the sanctions, turning the tragedy with the Malaysian Boeing into an anti-Russian farce.

So, most likely, the sanctions will be adopted.

The only question is how to react to them.

Moscow, of course, reacts indignantly.

The Russian Foreign Ministry called the statement of the Germans and the French "unacceptable in content and tone", "a threat and an attempt at blackmail."

And moreover, very strange blackmail, where logic does not live at all.

Russia is required to initiate an investigation, in response to which Moscow (not abandoning this investigation) asks for the facts on the basis of which the case will be initiated.

Not the information about the Kennedy assassination and not the evidence of the landing of aliens in Roswell - just the materials that were dug up by the Berlin doctors in the Charite clinic and which prove the fact of Navalny's poisoning with weapons of mass destruction.

However, numerous requests from the Foreign Ministry and the Russian Prosecutor General's Office are sabotaged, after which Paris and Berlin claim that the Kremlin "does not want to cooperate."

That is why what is happening should be called "a threat and an attempt at blackmail."

As Viktor Vodolatsky, First Deputy Head of the State Duma Committee on CIS Affairs, Eurasian Integration and Relations with Compatriots, correctly noted, this is a "cheating and fraud in relation to Russia."

But why is this cheating done?

The end of Navalniad depends on the answer to this question.

Some argue that the EU is taking Russian-European relations to a new level of escalation.

"Apparently, France and Germany are now becoming the head of the" anti-Russian coalition "that is being formed in the European Union, despite the assurances that were repeatedly voiced earlier from Paris and Berlin of commitment to partnership with Russia," said Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova.

Perhaps this is really so - the Western world needs consolidation, and it is best to collect yourself and your stones against a common enemy, the most convenient candidate for the role of which is Russia.

In addition, a sweet feeling of revenge on Moscow for the failure of Europe in Belarus can become an addition to the sanctions cake.

And it's not even about the failed coup, but about the inability of the EU countries to reach a compromise on sanctions against Lukashenka.

A failure that demonstrated to the world the weakness of Europe and the strength of Russia, which promptly and competently defended the Old Man.

However, there is another point of view: the attempts of France and Germany may in fact be an attempt to de-escalate while saving face.

It is enough to look at the text of the official statement of Paris and Berlin.

It speaks of sanctions that “will target people whom we believe are responsible for this crime and this violation of international standards because of their official functions, as well as those participating in the Novichok program.

That is, about personal sanctions, which Russia would not have avoided in this situation (it would be foolish to hope that Merkel would come out to the public, bow her head and admit that there was no poisoning).

At the same time, economic sanctions would become a "new level of escalation", including against Nord Stream 2.

There can be many motives for the EU to end Navalniada.

And the complete absurdity of the accusation, on the basis of which it is difficult for even the most shameless politicians to build a pan-European sanctions structure (recall that in the Skripals case, where there was at least some kind of texture, the EU managed to agree only on the expulsion of a number of Russian diplomats).

And the understanding by the same Macron of the need to cooperate with Putin to contain Erdogan, who opposed both the European Union and Russia at the same time.

And finally, the unwillingness to sacrifice European interests for the sake of American wishes (and the United States will be the main beneficiary of the aggravation of relations between the EU and the Russian Federation).

Which of the two versions is correct will be clear in the near future.

Of course, I would like the second to be correct.

However, unfortunately, it has not been easy to be an optimist in European affairs lately.

There is too much language in European politics and too little intelligence.

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