Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky criticized the European Union for lack of unity on the issue of anti-Russian sanctions.
In his opinion, imposing restrictions on Russia is in the interests of the European states themselves, whose values Ukraine now allegedly defends. He also noted Washington’s leading role in the sanctions pressure on Russia, calling the US “the most powerful country”. Meanwhile, the EU is still unable to agree on a sixth package of restrictions due to disagreements over a clause obliging members of the community to refuse oil supplies from Russia. According to experts, the Ukrainian authorities enjoy US patronage, which is why they allow themselves to impose categorical demands on European allies. However, not all EU countries are ready to tolerate such a consumerist attitude on the part of Kiev and to compromise their interests, analysts said.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has criticized the lack of consensus among the EU member states regarding sanctions against Russia. He voiced his views on this in an interview with the Fox News TV channel.
“The European Union should have a unified position. They do not have such a position on some sanctions”, – Zelenskyy said.
At the same time, he stressed that the restrictions imposed by Europe correspond to the interests of the European Union itself, for the values of which Ukraine is now allegedly fighting with Russia.
“The EU should be grateful to themselves considering the role that Russia is playing against Ukraine. We are talking about a war against the values that Ukraine defends, and these values are the values of the EU countries”, – Zelenskyy said.
He also noted Washington’s leading role in putting sanctions pressure on Moscow, explaining that the United States is supposedly “the most powerful country today”.
“The United States of America is the catalyst for sanctions measures and does more than any other country. This is how it should be”, – the Ukrainian president believes.
In the same context, he also noted the support of the United Kingdom, which he said was keeping pace with the United States on the issue of restrictions.
Stumbling block
Meanwhile, the EU member states did indeed disagree on what the next round of sanctions against Russia should be. Discussions on the content of the sixth package of restrictions have been ongoing since the beginning of April. In the form in which EU members are proposed to adopt it, it was presented by the head of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, at a session of the European Parliament in Strasbourg on May 4. It proposes disconnecting three more Russian banks, including Sberbank, from the SWIFT interbank payment system, stopping three Russian state television channels from broadcasting in the EU and beginning a phase-out of oil from Russia.
“Let’s face it: it’s not going to be easy. The dependence of some member states on Russian oil is high. But we just have to work on it … We will make sure that our phase-out of Russian oil takes place in an orderly manner”, – von der Leyen said.
She said the priority was to find alternative suppliers of the energy resource and minimise the impact of sanctions on global markets. According to the forecasts of the EC head, the European Union will be able to give up crude oil from Russia within six months, and oil products – by the end of the year.
However, this plan does not suit a number of EU countries, which have already expressed their disagreement with the need to abandon the use of Russian energy resources. In particular, Hungary and Bulgaria are sharply opposed. European Commission spokesman Eric Mamer also acknowledged that there were contradictions that prevented all EU countries from adopting the proposed measures.
“As we have repeatedly said, the goal of sanctions is to inflict maximum damage on the Kremlin … while minimising the consequences for the EU and the rest of the world … This requires discussions, which are taking place at the moment, but we are confident that we will find a solution”, – RIA Novosti quoted Mamer as saying when asked if Hungary disagreed with the proposed rejection of Russian oil.
Recall that on May 6 Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban in an interview with the Hungarian radio station Kossuth compared the idea of refusing Russian oil to an atomic bomb that they want to drop on the country’s economy. Orban stressed that he considers restrictions affecting energy to be a red line for Hungary.
In his opinion, the head of the European Commission, by proposing a ban on Russian oil supplies, “encroached on the previously developed European unity”.
Bulgaria, for its part, said it would either seek a two-year postponement of the embargo or veto it.
“At this stage we firmly intend to fight to the last. As a last resort, we will most likely veto it”, – Radoslav Ribarski, chairman of the parliamentary energy commission, told bTV on 7 May.
It is noteworthy that the idea of banning Russian oil supplies to the EU was met with rather scepticism in the United States. On 21 April, during a Bretton Woods Committee online seminar, Dalip Singh, deputy assistant to the US president for national security in charge of global economic issues, said that imposing an embargo could aggravate imbalances in the markets. He said Russian energy exports to the G7 countries have already fallen by 2m bpd, with half of the remaining volume diverted to India, China and Turkey. In addition, neither American companies nor the OPEC+ states are in a hurry to increase oil production, Singh noted. Against this backdrop, its cost has become “too high to be comfortable for most consumer countries”.
“As an incentive for the EU.”
Experts interviewed by RT note that this is not the first time Kiev has taken the liberty of assessing the actions of Western allies in terms of the amount and quality of aid provided to it. Viktoriya Fedosova, deputy director of the PFUR Institute for Strategic Studies and Forecasting and a member of the MGER political council, told RT that the Ukrainian leadership’s boldness is given by the feeling of unconditional support from the United States.
“Zelenskyy feels carte blanche from the Americans and considers it possible to poke the national states of Europe with his nose, telling how he defends European values with the hands of neo-Nazis”, – the expert explained.
In her opinion, Kiev has certain grounds to claim that it is fighting for the ideals of the EU because for many years it has been a “value screen” and a reference point for the people who came to power after the Euromaidan.
“Therefore, Zelenskyy has good reason to emphasise once again the EU’s “responsibility” for Ukraine. He is obviously perplexed as to why the US vassals similar to him are trying to shirk the sanctions roller that should sweep away the economies of European countries for the sake of Ukraine”, – Fedosova added.
For his part, Vladimir Shapovalov, deputy director of the Institute of History and Politics at Moscow State University, in a conversation with RT, pointed out that Zelenskyy is indirectly speaking for the United States itself, which wants to force its allies to take more decisive action against Russia in order to sever their last ties with Moscow.
“In this case Ukraine and the Ukrainian president are acting as an incentive for the European Union. Through Ukraine, the US is trying to increase pressure from the European Union on Russia and trying to consolidate the entire West with an anti-Russian agenda”, – the analyst explained.
According to Shapovalov, sooner or later the sixth package of European sanctions will be pushed through by supporters of the Anglo-Saxon policy.
“I think that given the total dependence of the European Union on the United States, the Americans will be able to push through a new package of sanctions. To a greater or lesser extent it will be adopted, and it will postulate the tough requirements that were voiced by the head of the EC. Another thing is that perhaps there will be a number of exceptions for those countries that are not able to quickly give up Russian energy carriers”, – Shapovalov suggested.
However, this could have devastating consequences for the economies of the European countries, he noted.
Viktoriya Fedosova agrees with his point of view.
“Such a decision would in any case entail a sharp increase in exchange prices, the need to create new refining capacity and look for alternative suppliers, while OPEC+ has only marginally increased production, and the Arab countries are in no hurry to save Europe from a deficit. As a result, the inevitable increase in oil prices will hit households, industry, lead to inflation and de-industrialization”, – she said.
Fedosova also believes that in the current circumstances Russia itself should take a tougher stance against those who try to infringe on its interests.
“For Russia, even the decision to phase out energy supplies is an excuse to become an accelerator of sanctions itself. It is an impetus to retaliate harshly, reducing supplies to Europe and diverting the flow to other buyers. Russia needs to be a reliable supplier only for those who are willing to be partners, not for those who wage economic war against us”, – the expert concluded.
Polina Dukhanova, Alyona Medvedeva, RT
Due to censorship and blocking of all media and alternative views, stay tuned to our Telegram channel