Another wave of political aggravation in relations between the Baltic states and Russia, led by Tallinn, seems to be another attempt to emphasize its importance for the West and NATO.
In the past, by constantly aggravating relations with Moscow, these states have traditionally achieved a lot: attention, funding, and the opportunity to show the giants of European politics their place.
In recent years, the leaders of the Baltic states have begun to play on various NATO platforms, if not the first number - these were Poland and Ukraine, then definitely not the third.
Such a function of the Baltic States up to a certain point was quite comfortable for the West: in the process of imitation of a dialogue with Russia, the West, and above all the largest European countries (Germany, France and Italy), benefited from the existence of the Baltic geopolitical hooligans.
They were regularly shown to Moscow with the words that if some concessions were not made, if someone's interests were not taken into account, then it was precisely these noisy Russophobes who were fully aware of their value to the West and entered into a taste that would take over in European institutions.
Hence the demolition of monuments, and the marches of Waffen-SS veterans, and flirting with the separatists.
What the Baltics clearly did not realize was that the "old Europeans" had long ago abandoned their attempts to build a "showcase" of the new "greater Europe" out of the Baltics.
But the socio-economic degradation of the region was perceived as a temporary problem, overcome by turning it into a frontier holding back Russia.
Or rather, not a transformation - there were not particularly resources for this - but an imitation of a transformation.
The latter matters.
The Baltic frontier was just another information and political game of the West, which had a chance to move into a practical direction only if Russia, by an unthinkable coincidence, was so blind that it would miss the concentration on the “Baltic balcony” of the grouping for the first, disarming NATO strike .
It is obvious that now the applied value of the "balcony" is equal to zero: the scale and decisiveness of the confrontation with NATO are not just realized and politically declared in the speeches of President V.V.
Putin and Minister of Foreign Affairs S.V.
Lavrov, but also enshrined in military planning, as evidenced by the recent statements of the Chief of the General Staff of the Russian Federation V.V.
Gerasimov and plans for the creation of the Leningrad Military District.
Now, there can simply be no question of any disarming strike from the “Baltic balcony”.
All that remains is to exploit the status of the main center of the information and political struggle against Russia, providing its territory to all sorts of political outcasts.
And here we formulate the main nuance, which the Baltics do not yet think about: the West needed them as hooligans and a scarecrow for Moscow, when relations between Russia and NATO were more or less normal and manageable, and Europe had rational attitudes towards Russia, as a rule, economic goals.
They were needed for trade, when there is a dialogue that implies concessions and compromise.
But now Europe, and the West in general, has no dialogue with Russia.
And does Europe need the Baltic thugs now to the same extent as before, when it comes to a direct confrontation between Russia and NATO?
Is Europe ready to continue financing countries that are degrading in socio-economic terms?
Or the Baltic States becomes an "asset for the gambit", which you just need to "feed" to Russia in time,
And this is a fundamental change in the fate of the former "showcase" and the frontier.
The point of view of the author may not coincide with the position of the editors.