High Representative of the IV Reich

The Catalan socialist Borrell, who became the EU's high representative for foreign affairs and security policy at the end of 2019, shows that a socialist is not necessarily a dove.

The representation of Borrell is notable for its sharply ideological militancy, which seems to be not even quite in line with the job requirements.

Diplomacy, by its classical definition, is the application of intelligence and tact to international relations.

Whereas in the service of Borrell, mind and tact, honestly, are not observed at all - they are replaced by extreme militancy and, as S.V.

Lavrov, arrogance.

Suffice it to recall his predecessor in this post (2014-2019), Italian Federica Mogherini, who now looks like a meek dove.

Moreover, during the years of her service, there is an acute conflict in the Donbass, and much more.

But Mogherini, who fully maintained the general line, at the same time did not look for trouble, rightly believing that there were other people for this.

The task of a diplomat is to defend the position of his sovereign within the framework of strictly diplomatic means and techniques.

To which "razzudy, shoulder, swing, hand" does not apply.

Moreover, the explanation “a different time - and other songs” does not even work here.

In the sense that on February 24, 2022, Russia “treacherously attacked” “peaceful Ukraine” and after that there was no other way out but to proclaim: “Get up, the EU is huge!”

In May 2019 (not only before the NWO, but also before the covid), Borrell, who had not yet been appointed head of European diplomacy, announced: “Our old enemy, Russia, says again:“ I'm here.

And again it poses a threat."

And at the beginning of 2021, he came to Moscow to demand the release of A.A.

Navalny.

Having received the appropriate answer, he became very embittered.

All this was a year before the tanks began to rumble.

After the beginning of the NWO, the diplomat finally turned into a strategist.

He announced that everything would be decided on the battlefield (why diplomacy at all then?), He says: “We (EU. - 

) are the army of Ukraine, since this war is a challenge to our security, an existential challenge.”

And he constantly demands from the EU countries tanks, planes, guns, shells - "to supply Ukraine with what is already in warehouses, without waiting for new production."

And in March - "I intend to present specific proposals for our industry to increase production at the beginning of March."

As the nursery rhyme said: “What kind of enforcer is this?

He climbed into an armored car."

Let us note that neither Lavrov nor Blinken extend their aspirations so broadly, confining themselves to diplomacy itself.

Of course, the German and Ukrainian Foreign Ministers Burbock and Kuleba partly act with a Borrell swing, and so the attitude towards them is appropriate.

And not only among enemies, but even among friends.

And it would be okay for Mogherini's dove, whose legacy her successor Borrell decisively put an end to.

For in the global crisis it is impossible to do otherwise.

But after all, Borrell had another predecessor.

High Representative of the III Reich (Borrel - representative of the Reich IV) Joachim von Ribbentrop, who held this post from 1938 to 1945, when there was also a global crisis.

Not to say that Ribbentrop was distinguished by left-wing views, not to say that he was a compromiser - and no one accused him of that.

He was a faithful son of the NSDAP with all the consequences.

Nevertheless, he was not engaged in the supply of armored vehicles and ammunition - for this there was the Reich Minister of Armaments Speer.

He didn’t even really twist the arms of the neutrals - in the case of Spain, this dubious pleasure fell to the Fuhrer himself.

Yes, Comrade Stalin said with particular passion: “To such treacherous people and monsters as Hitler and Ribbentrop”, “Such monsters and cannibals as Hitler and Ribbentrop”, but it was rather a personal insult to the fact that the Soviet-German pact about non-aggression, signed in Moscow by Ribbentrop, turned out to be a piece of paper.

It is clear that in cannibalism the Fuhrer and the head of his diplomacy were at very different levels.

If we look at Ribbentrop and his colleagues from the anti-Hitler camp - Eden, Molotov - then in terms of official powers and areas of responsibility (we take morality out of the brackets), they were figures of approximately the same type.

classic diplomats.

Which, in principle, is neither good nor bad - a diplomat, like a military leader, serves his political leadership, and what kind of leadership it is, what goals it pursues and what it brings to the world is another question.

Whereas the current high representative of the IV Reich is his own political leadership.

Or at least he strongly claims to be.

This is his difference, for example, from von Ribbentrop.

Everything is mixed up in the current Western order based on rules.

In particular, it is no longer possible to understand who is responsible for what and who to ask for what.

The Borrell Case is one of the clearest and most prominent examples of this new order.

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