The European Parliament recognized the special role of NATO forces in the issue of "deterring Russian aggression." This is stated in the preliminary version of the resolution of the EP on the annual report on the implementation of the Common Security and Defense Policy of the European Union.
“The European Parliament welcomes and supports Operation Atlantic Decision” (conducted in Europe since 2014 to strengthen NATO’s eastern flank and counteract Russia. - RT ), as well as NATO’s expanded forward presence in Europe, recognizing the importance of NATO forces in deterring further Russian aggression and the provision of critical assistance in the event of a conflict, ”the document reads, with the text of which RT got acquainted.
Statements of the “Russian threat” are constantly made in the West. As Russian President Vladimir Putin emphasized, Europe deliberately uses this myth for its own benefit and at the same time realizes that Russia does not plan to attack anyone.
“Despite all the problems with Ukraine, with speculations around the Crimea and the Donbass, everyone understands that Russia is not going to attack anyone. How many inhabitants in the European Union? How many inhabitants in NATO countries? What is the total economic and military potential? This is just bullshit, bullshit. “The Russian threat” is an invention of those who want to cash in on their role as the advanced detachment in the fight against Russia, to receive some bonuses and preferences for this, ”the head of state said.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, in turn, noted that Russophobia has already penetrated deeply into Europe and is “going through the roof” in the rhetoric of NATO representatives.
At the same time, the North Atlantic Alliance itself is constantly increasing activity near Russian borders. So, the number of approaches by combat aviation of the bloc to the borders of Russia doubled last year - more than 400 cases were recorded. In addition, the unit regularly conducts exercises in the Baltic Sea and in the Baltic states and Poland. As the head of the Russian Ministry of Defense Sergey Shoigu noted, the situation at the borders of the country remains tense.
"(Situation. - RT ) is characterized by the strengthening of NATO's military presence in Eastern Europe, the deployment of the US missile defense system in Poland and Romania, and the expansion of military cooperation between the alliance with Finland and Sweden," the minister said.
To maintain the current situation, the West is deliberately discussing the topic of a possible “Russian aggression,” Vladimir Olenchenko, a senior fellow at the Center for European Studies at IMEMO RAS, said.
“Tensions were created in NATO when a decision was made on the additional deployment of weapons and military units on the territory of the Baltic countries and Poland. But now there are signs that the myth of the “Russian threat” is losing its popularity, many countries are beginning to doubt it, ”he said in an interview with RT.
According to Olenchenko, the alliance acts as a tool to preserve the anti-Russian vector in EU policy, and the European Parliament has repeatedly demonstrated support for such a policy.
- European Parliament Chamber
- Reuters
- © Vincent Kessler
Accusations for Convincing
Against this background, the preliminary version of the EP resolution on the annual report on the implementation of the BSEC calls for a common policy towards Russia.
"The European Parliament expresses concern about the activities and policies of Russia, which continue to destabilize and change the security situation ... He emphasizes the need to agree on a common position regarding EU policies in this context," the draft resolution says.
At the same time, the authors of the document cite a number of accusations against Russia. In particular, in their opinion, Moscow allegedly repeatedly violated the Treaty on the Elimination of Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Range Missiles (INF Treaty), including the development of the 9M729 missile.
Recall that the INF Treaty lost its power last year after the United States unilaterally left it. In accordance with the agreement signed in 1987, the parties committed themselves to destroy ground-based missiles with a range of 500 to 5500 km and launchers for them. Washington in recent years argued that the Russian Federation did not fulfill the conditions and created 9M729. At the same time, representatives of the United States and other Western countries ignored a briefing by the Russian Ministry of Defense, which revealed the technical characteristics of the shell, confirming that the missile range is 480 km, that is, does not go beyond the scope of the agreement.
The EP resolution also points to Russia's “violation” of the air and sea borders of NATO countries.
Various alliance states have made similar allegations, but the Russian Ministry of Defense has repeatedly denied such allegations. One of the last incidents of this kind occurred in September last year, when Estonia stated that a Russian Su-34 fighter-bomber, flying to the Kaliningrad region, allegedly violated its borders. In response, the military department indicated that in fact this flight took place within the framework of international rules, and this is confirmed by the data of objective control means.
The document of the European Parliament also once again mentions the theme of the reunification of Crimea with Russia, the mythical "occupation" of eastern Ukraine and allegedly non-compliance by the Minsk Agreement with Moscow.
At the same time, the fact that Russian officials have repeatedly pointed out the absence of the Russian military in Ukraine is not taken into account again. Moreover, Russia is not a party to the conflict and acts only as a guarantor of the implementation of the Minsk agreements. Moreover, Moscow is making every effort to contribute to the speedy resolution of the crisis in the neighboring country.
As for the Crimea, Russian officials regularly remind that a legal referendum took place in 2014, during which the inhabitants of the peninsula called for his return to the Russian Federation.
“The people of Crimea made a decision, voted. The issue is historically closed, there is no return to the previous system at all, ”said Vladimir Putin.
It is worth noting that not all EU countries see Russia as a “security threat”. So, French President Emmanuel Macron in 2019 called for a radical review of relations with Moscow and forging cooperation. Without the participation of the Russian Federation, it is impossible to resolve any of the key international conflicts, the French leader believes.
“I think pushing Russia further from Europe is a profound strategic mistake. We are pushing Russia either on the path of isolation, which only increases tension, or on alliance with other great powers, such as China, which is not in our interests at all, ”said Macron.
- French President Emmanuel Macron
- AFP
- © Ludovic Marin
For the establishment of relations with Russia, Italian, German, Slovak politicians also advocate.
The Russian Foreign Ministry believes that Macron and other European leaders are making attempts to change Russophobian sentiments in the EU. This approach is very important for diplomacy, emphasized Sergey Lavrov.
As noted by political analyst Vladimir Olenchenko, the interests of EU countries diverge greatly. Leading states recognize the importance of partnership with Russia, and this is mainly opposed by relatively new EU members - Baltic states, countries of Eastern Europe. It is they who often promote anti-Russian resolutions to the European Parliament.
“Unfortunately, the European Parliament does not take a constructive position in favor of the EU, although it should express the interests of the entire European Union. For the most part, he takes a stand in favor of those who promote Euro-Atlantic ideas. By this we mean the partnership of the EU and the USA with the unconditional leadership of the States, ” expert added.
Unity cracked
Politics regarding Russia is not the only issue that causes controversy in the West. In this regard, the document of the European Parliament emphasizes the importance of cooperation between “united Europe” and the North Atlantic Alliance.
“The European Parliament emphasizes that a strategic partnership between the EU and NATO is fundamental to addressing the security challenges facing the EU and its neighboring countries ... He believes that cooperation between the EU and NATO should strengthen both organizations, fully take into account them features and roles and continue with full observance of the principles of inclusiveness, reciprocity and autonomy in decision-making, in particular when the common interests or interests of the EU are at stake, ” write to the EP.
However, in practice, more and more disagreements have recently arisen within the alliance. For example, there is no unity among members of the bloc regarding defense spending - The United States insists that all participants bring their spending to 2% of GDP, as agreed at the NATO summit in 2014. However, most alliance states still do not comply with this indicator. Many of them express their readiness to achieve the desired level only in 2024, and in Germany they even announced about the 2031st.
The question of how exactly the bloc’s members should spend their defense budgets is also controversial: some countries are unhappy that Washington is imposing its weapons on them.
“We must not allow the Fifth Article of the NATO Charter (on collective defense. - RT ) to turn under pressure from Washington into“ Article F-35 ”(Lockheed Martin. - RT fighter-bombers), which would oblige NATO countries to buy American weapons” , - said earlier the head of the French Ministry of Defense Florence Parley.
Moreover, European leaders even wonder about the feasibility of a bloc. According to Emmanuel Macron, the “brain death” of the alliance is observed.
“In view of the inconstancy of our American partner and growing tension, the idea of creating a mechanism of European security is gradually becoming more and more significant ... I would add that at some point we will have to reconsider the expediency of NATO. It seems to me that the brain of NATO is now dying. We need to soberly assess the situation, ”he stressed.
Commenting on the words of the politician, former Austrian Foreign Minister Karin Kneisl noted that the “very strong crack” in the alliance has been felt since 2003, when the US was preparing for the invasion of Iraq.
In January, German Chancellor Angela Merkel spoke for a more independent European policy. According to her, the EU should not rely solely on the United States on the issue of security, but should develop its own military capabilities.
Washington is trying to create an image of defenders in the information space through the NATO bloc, which today does not play such an important role, the military political scientist, the head of the Department of Political Science and Sociology at REU named after. G.V. Plekhanova Andrey Koshkin.
“NATO is a bridle of European states, and European states want to free themselves from this, because of this the first cracks went on the discussion about who should pay more to NATO, and the USA, having pressed European states, caused serious rejection,” the expert said.