Before his visit to Russia, the head of EU diplomacy, Josep Borrell, said that our country "remains a neighbor and partner of paramount importance."
He spoke about the need to continue the dialogue, in which it is necessary to "firmly voice their demands."
All this will guarantee that Europe will become a "global player", will "be able to influence such important issues for our security as Syria, Libya, Nagorno-Karabakh, Belarus or Ukraine."
That is, the tactics are clear: a stake on dialogue and firmness in their requirements.
It seems to be nothing new, except for the absence of threatening speeches about the isolation of Russia, a list of standard reproaches and threats.
But we are talking about a diplomat, and the diplomatic style of communication just comes to the fore when relations come to a standstill.
Therefore, the emphasis on dialogue is important, especially in a situation when choruses of voices are heard calling to the very dead end.
Those demanding to punish, punish, stigmatize Russia and limit all contacts with it.
In short, to lower the iron curtain and deprive her of the status of not only a partner, but also a neighbor ...
It is no secret that the extreme degree of tension in relations between Russia and Europe began in 2014 after the well-known events in Ukraine.
In Russia, it is believed that, among other things, European countries actively intervened in the processes taking place there and condoned the coup d'etat.
In Europe, they talk about Russia's aggressive actions.
Last year, there were new points of aggravation: the events in Belarus and the unfolding political and adventurous series related to the affairs and adventures of blogger Navalny.
Euro influence in all this can be traced to the naked eye.
So the projected demonization of Russia reaches its climax.
It must be said that the visit itself and Borrell's rhetoric are not accidental.
Recently, President Putin, in his speech at a forum in Davos, focused on the relationship between Russia and Europe.
He said that Russia is a part of Europe, that we are linked by long-standing cultural, historical and other ties.
The Russian president called for a return to a "positive agenda" and called the current situation "abnormal."
Putin also talked about dialogue, but noted that it must be "honest."
Then he referred to the German Chancellor Helmut Kohl, who noted that “if European culture wants to survive and remain one of the centers of world civilization in the future, bearing in mind all the problems and trends in the development of world civilization, then, of course, Western Europe and Russia should be together".
Russia does not change its stake on cooperation and does not go into rejection and confrontation.
She hopes for respect, and not for the perception of herself as a spontaneous, unpredictable and dangerous undergrowth.
Again, it is very significant that we are not following a simple path and are not adopting the slogan “Russia is not Europe”.
We do not cut, do not separate, but instead of a particle of negation-opposition - the union "and".
We do not oppose ourselves.
Russia is just a world of pluralities and uniqueness, interacting on the principle of harmony and complementarity, rather than rejection and confrontation.
The bet on contradictions is not our element.
It is obvious that the EU reacted to this proposal for a dialogue and responded to the Russian president through the lips of its most authoritative politician, who in many ways repeated Putin's words.
The fact that Russia is a “partner of paramount importance” is well understood in Europe.
They know that a normal, non-hysterical conversation with Moscow is extremely beneficial in all respects.
That Russia is not a threat at all, but on the contrary, an ally with whom it is possible to overcome the current global challenges and dangers.
But the problem is in inertia and in pressure: external - from the senior comrade, the United States, who, in fact, does not care about the interests of Europe.
The States of the Old World are considered to a greater extent as a deterrent for Russia, which means that conflicts and contradictions must be fueled by any inspired ways.
The problem is also in the heterogeneity of Europe itself.
It has supporters of an extreme confrontational policy with Russia.
So it turns out that consensus within the EU is achieved, as a rule, through frowning eyebrows and menacing speeches in relation to our country.
Perhaps through this they are trying to avoid a European split.
They say that Russia will not go anywhere, it is accustomed to this, perhaps, besides, it will begin to rebuild itself, as in the old days, by itself it will become pliable and obedient: what is ordered, it will do.
The old cliches of perception of our country as a natural, natural, if not an enemy, then a fierce competitor, also influence relations.
Although it's high time to move away from these clichés.
What kind of eternal enemy can there be in a fragile nuclear world? .. By the way, the axiom has again become obvious that without Russia there will be no progress in global security issues.
On our initiative, the US-Russian START III treaty was extended.
For the same Europe, this issue is fundamentally important - after all, in the event of an arms race, it easily turns into a missile depot and a potential zone of instability.
Borrell's emphasis on firmness in his demands is also no coincidence.
Europe makes it clear that it will not make concessions and does not intend to change its view on certain things.
The diplomat will speak in Moscow about supporting the Russian "civil society".
True, as the same Ukrainian events have shown, the criteria for this society are also very vague: civil society staged a coup in Kiev, and in Crimea and Donbass it was not civil society, but something else.
Of course, he will also touch upon the topic of Navalny, believing that he is now the main trump card of pressure on Moscow.
At the same time, it should be understood that all these requirements that are presented to us very often cross the fine line, beyond which pressure begins, then - interference in internal affairs, as well as blackmail with sanctions.
Here, too, it would be necessary to understand the degree of European "hardness" and discuss its criteria, otherwise it turns out that they stop hearing us, do not want to understand.
And what kind of honest dialogue can there be in this situation? ..
“We have something to talk about with the EU,” said Maria Zakharova, spokesman for the Russian Foreign Ministry, on the eve of Borrell’s visit.
It was said that Sergei Lavrov, in a conversation with a European diplomat, would raise the issue of a system of distorting mirrors through which information about what is happening in our country is broadcast.
The question of the existence of these distortions also cannot be ignored, especially in a conversation with a “partner of paramount importance”.
Although it is not at all excluded that Borrell will try to explain that dialogue with a partner is one thing, and new sanctions is another.
So nothing personal ...
The certain optimism of the head of European diplomacy is also important, who again noted that, despite numerous contradictions, the EU and Russia can work together.
With longing and nostalgia, Josep Borrell recalls the 90s.
Before his trip to Russia, he also said that “in the 90s, we dreamed of a different Europe and worked together to solve global problems.
Unfortunately, in 2021, these dreams are at odds with reality.
However, they should still inspire us, and we should strive to implement them. "
So Russia is not against it, only we do not want to be in the state in which we were in those years.
We don’t want to create hotbeds of instability around Russia, work to alienate the former Soviet republics from it, make a monster of a global scale, from which all the axes of evil emanate.
We don’t want a situation when they want to punish us, teach and teach us a lesson all the time.
Maybe for those unrealized dreams of a “different Europe”?
Was there really a place for Russia next to it, or was our country supposed to become something else, stop being itself?
Isn't its very existence an obstacle to the implementation of these plans?
Or can Europe remain the center of world civilization and be truly sovereign only by maintaining normal relations with Russia?
Honest relationship.
Still, in the same 90s, to which the diplomat refers, this honesty was lacking.
It is possible that because of this, all further problems, rejection and dead ends arose.
A breakthrough in relations cannot be expected from the visit of the chief European diplomat.
But the fact that the possibility of a dialogue with us is not denied and even welcomed, and thanks for that.
But suddenly Borrell (and through him Europe) will try to understand that the whole point is in distortions, in the fact that the current firmness in the demands of one side practically excludes the possibility of hearing and understanding the position of the other.
Perhaps, through overcoming these distortions, the long-awaited light of “another Europe” will dawn brighter.
All of a sudden…
I remember that not so long ago the French leader Macron spoke about the need to awaken Europe.
And in fact, it would be time to wake up, otherwise the feeling of hibernation and stay in some kingdom of crooked mirrors is really present.
The author's point of view may not coincide with the position of the editorial board.