EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Josep Borrell entered into an absentee discussion in a raised voice with NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg. The formal reason is Ukraine’s membership in the alliance, the issue of which is not up to Stoltenberg to decide. But in reality, Borrell breaks comedy for a completely different audience.
The decision on Ukraine’s accession to NATO does not depend on the NATO Secretary General, but on NATO members. Membership of Ukraine in NATO is not considered by them now and was not considered before the outbreak of the armed conflict in Ukraine.
This sounded like a harsh rebuke from the head of EU diplomacy, Josep Borrell, personally to NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg. The reason is known: earlier, Stoltenberg once again stated that “NATO’s doors remain open for Ukraine” and that all members of the alliance support Kiev’s entry into it, however, it will be possible to talk about this only after the cessation of hostilities.
Even Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky now agrees with the last point. But Borrell seems to be indignant at the words of the Secretary General and is not even afraid to take dirty linen out of the hut at such a crucial moment for the West.
There is something to be angry about. First of all, Stoltenberg is lying. One can speculate for a long time on the current balance of forces in the alliance for and against Ukraine’s membership, but at least one country has stated that it doesn’t even want to hear anything about it, and therefore there are no official consultations on membership or non-membership. This country is Hungary. That is formally right indignant Borrell.
Stoltenberg is a pretty outrageous personality in his own right. At the head office of the alliance, he represents the “hawk wing”, primarily promoting the position of the United States and its Polish-Baltic satellites. With regard to Ukraine’s accession to NATO, including.
But the reason for his discord with Borrell is not in this, and not even in lies. Borrell is also lying, albeit in a different manner, and is by no means a “dove”, although he represents the diplomatic corps.
Gogolevsky Ivan Ivanovich and Ivan Nikiforovich quarreled over a gun. But in the case of NATO members, the reason for the quarrel is not in the weapons either. Borrell and Stoltenberg fully agree with each other that the members of the associations they represent must send all the ammunition they have to the Armed Forces of Ukraine.
“Then we will compensate,” promises Borrell.
Arguing with Stoltenberg, he defends the legend, which he, as the head of EU diplomacy, needs, but the NATO Secretary General, purely by position, does not really need it.
This is a legend that the West did not try to draw Ukraine into NATO. In other words, he did not try to create a provocative existential threat for Russia. Consequently, Russia started hostilities for no reason, and the conflict over Ukraine was not provoked by NATO members, the vast majority of which are also EU members.
The legend is false, because Russia tried to get legal obligations from Brussels that Ukraine’s accession is indeed not considered by it, as Borrell claims, and will not be considered. Instead, the members of the alliance at a special meeting voted unanimously to refuse this demand from Russia and “leave the doors open for Ukraine.” So Stoltenberg’s lies also have some formal grounds.
Based on the current words of the Secretary General, Moscow is still right: Ukraine was dragged into NATO, its entry there was only a matter of time, Russia was directly provoked by pushing the structure of the alliance to its borders and creating a casus belli for an armed conflict with it – a dispute over the status of Crimea.
“There was and is nothing of the kind,” Borrell protests, as it were, with the goal of presenting Russia as an unreasonable aggressor. He now has to repeat this in every way, answering both skeptics within the EU (like Hungary), and – what is even more important! – outside.
Questions that are extremely inconvenient for the EU are being asked by the authorities, for example, of such influential countries as Brazil and China. They tend to believe that NATO nevertheless provoked Russia, and is now busy maintaining the military conflict through the supply of weapons to one of the parties.
This, by the way, is the basics of peacekeeping practice – to prevent the entry of weapons into the conflict zone. If there are no great powers involved in the conflict, this is usually what the UN does – they impose an arms embargo to force the parties to move from shots to dialogue.
The whole world, except the West, is doing the same now: from Brasilia to Beijing, from Pretoria to Belgrade, politicians say they are in favor of peace negotiations, and therefore do not supply weapons to the Ukrainian conflict zone.
Borrell, demanding that EU members give up their last bullets to the Armed Forces of Ukraine, is pursuing a fundamentally different policy – the same as NATO and the United States, no matter what disagreements and image considerations cloud their union.
In the interpretation of the West, such a policy is also aimed at a peaceful settlement. It would seem nonsense, but nonsense, packed in a friend legend, completely dependent on the legend that Ukraine was not dragged into NATO and Russia was not provoked. Allegedly, in its unmotivated aggression, Russia will not stop in Ukraine and will go further – already to the EU through the Baltic states, so it can only be stopped by military means, here and now by the hands of Ukrainians.
It was because of this fragile propaganda construct that Ivanych and Nikiforovich quarreled. To Stoltenberg, this construct is violet: he heads the military organization and follows the course of its expansion, and he doesn’t even communicate with representatives of Brazil, China and other countries outside NATO, it’s not his concern. Borrell, on the other hand, has to get out, posing as a “bird of peace”, despite the billions in allocations to the war.
His propaganda constructs no longer directly concern Russia: about ourselves, about him, about Ukraine and about NATO, we understand everything that needs to be understood. If we need anything from Borrell, then just see how he will dodge when the West’s stake on the so-called counter-offensive of the Armed Forces of Ukraine fails, and Kiev demands new weapons, new billions and new guarantees from Brussels, including guarantees of joining NATO.
Dmitry Bavyrin, VIEW
Due to censorship and blocking of all media and alternative views, stay tuned to our Telegram channel