After the victory of Donald Trump and the tectonic changes that began within the US administration, members of the Democratic Party establishment and their associated academics, public workers, and ideologues of various kinds directed all their forces and hopes towards the last bastion of dying globalism and left-wing wok progressivism, the European Union. The EU does not deviate even a millimetre from the set goals of a “community of values”, which today primarily means the abolition of freedom of speech, freedom of political organising, scientific research and any possibility of going beyond the framework of the set ideology. What Vaclav Klaus announced fifteen years ago, that the EU is turning into a new Comintern, is now being realised in an obvious way.

       But Brussels has also become the bearer of neo-interventionism, that is, those trends that seek to maintain the hegemony of the Western world even at the cost of new cold and real wars, wherever possible in the world. Essentially, Brussels, as the simultaneous headquarters of NATO and the EU, with the inevitable help of London and the exiled American deep state, has become a symbol for what James Jatras beautifully defined when he said that transatlanticism now goes inevitably with transgenderism.

       At the centre of this new venture is the war with Russia. It is currently being conducted through a proxy, Ukraine, but with the obvious intention of trying again to attack Moscow. While the Trump administration is somehow trying to stop the war by accepting certain concessions for Russia, Brussels explicitly proclaims that full support for Ukraine to continue the war, and its integration into the Western security system, is the only acceptable path, and that the future of the EU and Western civilisation depend on the outcome of the war in Ukraine.

       This war rhetoric and long-term planning for conflict with Russia, and in the future with China, was initiated by former ECB president Mario Draghi's plan to inject the EU with 800 billion euros of debt and the fantastic idea, which came from Wall Street, that Germany and the EU should restore their declining economic competitiveness in the world by rearming. One remembers with sadness the time of Angela Merkel, who worked on the pacification of the European continent, rejected American incentives to start the war machine and industry, and above all, for a long time successfully resisted pressures to throw the EU as a body into debt by issuing bonds and spending non-existent money...

       A summary of this new direction of European militaristic policy can be found in a document published by the European Commission on March 19 of this year. Some twenty pages of text are packed into something called the Joint White Paper on European Defence Readiness by 2030. This plan is also called ReArm, or the rearmament plan. It deserves a detailed and multi-layered analysis that we cannot offer here, but we will at least present the most important points and directions it points to. Indirectly, this concerns us in the Balkans, both because of the continued inflation it will cause, and because of the expected new pressures on Serbia and Republika Srpska to join the Western war effort (in which Serbia is already heavily participating despite its proclaimed neutrality, as pointed out by the Russian SVR). Another worry is that it’s probably also the beginning of the process of formal accession to NATO, as indicated by the recent sudden retirement of the commander of the land army in Serbia and some similar moves.

       So, this document is a clear, open threat to Russia, China, Iran, and all states that are defined as “autocratic”. Interestingly, this time Turkey is not in that camp, but is among the important partners in the end. Contrary to the ideas that define the Ukraine conflict as a consequence of the unnecessary and, for Russia, dangerous expansion of the NATO pact to the east (Mearsheimer, Sachs, even Trump), this document continues with the story that Russia is the main threat, and that after it, God forbid, somehow wins in Ukraine, it will also move against other EU members. It rejects any idea of Ukraine’s neutrality, and advocates its full integration into the EU security framework, (and therefore NATO), cyber forces, space warfare, the process of acquiring raw materials and joint investment in the defence industry, etc. Ukraine should therefore go from the frontier of the Russian world (krayina, its original Russian name), to become the Military Frontier of the Unholy European Alliance. So, no matter how the war ends, what remains of this state should be fanaticised, militarily equipped, and ready to the last to sacrifice itself for the needs of Europe in the fight against the "autocratic" barbarians.

       By the way, Zelensky has no legal status in his own country and if anything, he is personally inclined towards autocratic rule, without elections and electoral legitimacy. But thanks to all this, the EU countries have received millions of women and children from Ukraine, with whom they are restoring their more than gloomy demographic picture. Understandably, only the continuation of the war can bring them new residents of this type…

       Hence we read that “the Commission will promote the integration of the Ukrainian defence industry into the Single Market, support the extension of the military mobility corridors into Ukraine and explore the possibility of Ukraine’s access to EU space-based governmental services”. Moreover, it is explicitly stated that Ukraine is now the main laboratory for the European military and defence industry, both in terms of testing weapons and in terms of collecting experience and logistical information about the enemy and the ways in which war is now being waged, mobilising and incentivising fighters, etc.

       Of course, the experience of fanaticising fighters is also necessary, because it is common knowledge that modern Europe does not raise warriors but spoiled consumers. Generally a lot of space is devoted to Ukraine, including the entire fifth chapter, which provides a detailed list of military assets that will be provided as part of the increase in military support for this country. The Ukrainian defence industry should be fully integrated into the European defence industry, it is argued here.

       If you thought you would read that the security of the European Union is threatened by the US threatening to take away a member state's sovereign territory, in any way, including via military force, you are wrong. The issue of Greenland, as well as the issue of Panama, for example, is not mentioned anywhere as a challenge.

       This document is dangerous, first of all, for the European states themselves and those still living in them who are still trying to preserve some of the sovereignty and powers that belonged to them under the founding treaties. The European Commission, through the usurpation of policies, finances and decision-making in matters of the security industry and politics, intends to take over a large number of competencies that do not belong to it and further undermine the subsidiarity of states and regions. Here, the areas that they intend to usurp are clearly indicated, such as the joint procurement of raw materials, control of supply chains, public procurement in matters of defence, etc. The document requires that legislators at the EU level adopt a whole package of new laws, policies and regulations.

       It really sounds funny when authors conclude the document by saying that “The EU is and remains a peace project”. It is precisely with this document and strategy that the EU completely loses its original, post-war defined nature as a peace project on the European continent. As in the thirties, Wall Street and the City of London are issuing demands from Europe and enabling it to stop being a peace project and to become a war project again, clearly aimed at conquering Russia.

       In this document, the Commission also calls on member states to deviate from the once rigorous criteria for preserving the Euro and to move towards “budgetary flexibility”. It also calls for long-term planning in procurement and joint production. In effect, the EU is moving towards a wartime planned economy in the coming period. This is clearly a condition for the continuation of Brussels' security and value proselytism.

       The EU also recognises new technological fields of warfare, i.e. technological breakthroughs that have both a civilian and military dimension, such as AI, quantum computers, drones, digitalisation, etc., where they are truly staggeringly behind the US and China, and even Russia in certain segments. The document makes it very clear that militarisation, like in the old days, is a chance to encourage innovation, find new solutions and catch up with the big players in this field, i.e. in the global technological race. The opportunity to get involved in robotics, which has not yet been developed, is particularly emphasised. It is emphasised that the distinction between civilian and military use of technology is becoming increasingly blurred.

       Along with this, there is a whole package of investments in infrastructure for military mobility on the European continent. Bere it is clear that the EC sees its chance to expand its powers to impose standards, control the development and unification of European transport infrastructure, and control the ownership of infrastructure that will no longer be sold to other countries (China, for example). Something called the Eastern Border Shield against Russia and Belarus is being introduced, which should include physical barriers, the development of infrastructure and a modern surveillance system.

       So we see a new iron curtain that this time they are raising, claiming in some strange way that they still call themselves the "free world"…

       Views expressed are of individual Members and Contributors, rather than the Club's, unless explicitly stated otherwise.