Blog

ABBREVIATION

The article focuses on the problematic European Union (EU) in the light of broader geopolitical developments. The issues on which the EU is called upon to adopt clear positions in order to formulate effective policy in important areas both internally and externally are briefly highlighted. This policy should ensure the cohesion, solidarity and unity of European societies, as well as the vital interests of the EU around the world, through visionary rather than managerial leadership.

The European Union (EU) has been the dream and compass of its people. Their common identitarian bond is democracy and secularism, which were conquered after centuries of bloody struggles of Europeans, when with ancient Greece as a compass they freed themselves from religious and feudal medieval authoritarianism.

Despite its gradually positive steps, the EU now faces decisive challenges for its future. It is commonly accepted that the power deficit does not make the EU a major geopolitical actor. At the moment, the EU is watching the negotiations on the Ukraine issue between the US and Russia discredited. The US, focusing on its economy and China, is completely reversing its policy so far on the Ukrainian issue, surprises everyone in Gaza, demands the acquisition of Greenland and sets tariffs. Putin and Trump praise each other, and when the basic principles of the agreement on Ukraine are reached, it seems that the only winners will be the two interlocutors. It is estimated that the EU and Ukraine will be invited to participate in the modalities of implementation of the Agreement and in the provision of security guarantees. It is characteristic that before the start of negotiations, the US accepts the cession of the conquered territories to Russia and the non-entry of Ukraine into NATO. These concessions lead to the assessment of a much broader negotiation between the two superpowers on the basis of “give and take”.

The common European foreign, defense and security policy is still a fundamental issue. The achievement of this goal requires a European decision and relevant measures on a number of important questions such as:

• What is and should be the EU’s place in the international system? Are there collective European interests and, if so, can the EU defend them anywhere in the world?
• The new U.S. leadership has put the country’s economy, its colossal debt and China high on its agenda. Is a superpower that demands the alignment of its partners with its political choices entitled to completely reverse these policies depending on the President in question and to insist on alignment? Does a possible re-European division into superpower spheres of influence serve the interests of the EU? Is the EU ready to respond to drastic changes in Euro-Atlantic relations?
• Is Russia approached on the basis of the Gaullist vision of a Europe from the Atlantic to the Urals or in terms of deterrence? Does cheap energy from Russia cause the EU to become politically dependent or not? Does the complete vindication of the invasion of Ukraine encourage any revisionist force or not?
• What are the tolerance limits for Chinese penetration in Europe, the Middle East and Africa? Is European policy on China identical to that of the United States? If not, where does it differ?
• While European deepening remains problematic, where does EU enlargement go? Are the enlargement criteria strict enough to ensure that the European value system is not disrupted and does not involve the EU in future external and internal problems? Do these criteria serve Europe or do they serve individual states of Europe?
• Is the EU merely a common market and a multiracial space of coexistence of diametrically opposed cultural concepts or a community of principles and values based on democracy and secularism? How realistic is living together “with mutual tolerance” democratic and authoritarian worldviews? Coexistence or assimilation as a condition for immigrants staying in the EU?
• Are the measures taken so far on the existential combination of demographic-migration issue sufficient?
•  Does the popular shift towards far-right parties signal the abrupt shift of Europeans towards extreme perceptions or the complete separation of perceptions of political leaders with the experiential perception of societies? Is religious authoritarianism compatible with Europe?
• Can European citizens freely express their concern about internal security deficiencies (protest, denunciation, humour) or risk being prosecuted as extremists under current law or even targeted by terrorists?
• Based on demographic data, immigration will increase dramatically in the coming years. What policy guarantees the preservation of the European democratic acquis, social cohesion and fair burden-sharing between Member States? Is immigration a human right or does it require a decision by sovereign host states?
• Are the long-standing democratic European origins inadequate and need to be supplemented with the woke agenda or not?
• Stronger European states must inspire confidence, set an example and anticipate the concerns of smaller Member States. If the policy of powerful states focuses on “I” rather than “we”, what is the most likely attitude of the Member States: solidarity, trust, cohesion and joint effort or insecurity, disregard for collective responsibility and national retrenchment?
• For an EU that has set itself the goal of strategic autonomy, why is American pressure needed to increase its defense spending? Military dependence on the US and NATO presupposes a constant alignment of interests between the US and the EU. Applies;
• Europe’s external borders are vital for geostrategic, economic, migratory and energy reasons. Are Europeans ready to defend them consciously and in solidarity, or are they solely interested in their national borders?
• Turkey is threatening expansion at the expense of EU member states such as Greece and Cyprus. Are European interests affected or are these simple Greek-Turkish differences that will be resolved through “dialogue”? Does Turkey have a place in Europe?
• Given Turkey’s destabilizing, neo-Ottoman, anti-Western, revisionist role, occupation of 37% of Cyprus and questioning of the sovereignty and sovereign rights of Greece and Cyprus, is its bilateral defence cooperation with EU Member States appropriate, unconditionally? Is Turkey’s overall defense involvement in European high-tech defense programs beneficial, while Turkey’s relations with Russia, China, Iran, Pakistan and terrorist organizations are well known?
• Will the EU continue to be the world leader in expensive “green” investment with significant adverse effects on the primary and business sector or will it exploit at least hydrocarbon energy sources within European territory?

The recent change of leadership in the US has accelerated geopolitical developments. Ukraine is inside the European home and Gaza in its backyard. The world has become very small and every major decision on the planet (political, economic, military, energy, etc.) is diffused and affects the international system. The difficulty of decision-making in the EU should be taken seriously in any attempt to enlarge it. The EU is called upon to develop a common foreign and defence policy, to take pragmatic decisions quickly and to implement them effectively and consistently. This requires visionary leadership, not managerial leadership. These leaderships must inspire European societies and lead them towards cohesion, not division. Europe is paying for the tragic mistakes of the 20th century, but this must not lead to timeless fatalistic introversion. Prolonging inefficiency will shatter the European dream and make the EU laggard and subservient. On the contrary, a strong Europe in a multipolar international system not only benefits its Member States but constitutes a global hope.

21 – February – 2025

Vice Admiral (Rd) V. Martzoukos HN

Vice President of HELISS (ELISME)