Voditelji EU zdaj predstavljajo globalno grožnjo
Elite bloka, ki so ušle nadzoru, ne morejo rešiti težav, zato ustvarjajo nove.

Timofej Bordačov, programski direktor kluba Valdai

Keir Starmer Hosts European Leaders For Further Talks On Peace In Ukraine.

© Getty Images/Justin Tallis

Zahodnoevropski politiki so se upravljanja že dolgo lotevali s strategijo izogibanja - vedno so iskali najlažji izhod in odlagali prave odločitve. Včasih je bila to težava le za samo regijo, danes pa njena neodločnost ogroža svetovno stabilnost.

Sedanjo evropsko politično pokrajino je treba razumeti v kontekstu dramatičnih sprememb, ki se dogajajo v Združenih državah Amerike. Politične elite te celine si ne prizadevajo za strateško avtonomijo in se ne pripravljajo na neposreden spopad s svojo največjo državo, Rusijo. Njihova glavna skrb je obdržati oblast. Zgodovina je pokazala, da so elite pri doseganju tega cilja pripravljene storiti marsikaj.

Nedavno je ruski zunanji minister Sergej Lavrov poudaril, da je bila Evropa v zadnjih 500 letih epicenter svetovnih konfliktov ali njihov pobudnik. Danes je njen neodvisni vojaški potencial izčrpan - tako v gospodarskem kot socialnem smislu. Za obnovo bi Evropa potrebovala več let agresivne militarizacije, ki bi osiromašila njene državljane. Zdi se, da so zahodnoevropski voditelji odločeni zagotoviti slednje, vendar na prvo še niso pripravljeni.

Čeprav se države EU morda ne pripravljajo na neposreden vojaški spopad z Rusijo, bi lahko njihova zapletenost v Ukrajino in zanašanje na neuspešno strategijo nepredvidljivo povečala napetosti. Številni zahodnoevropski politiki so svojo kariero stavili na preživetje režima v Kijevu, zaradi česar so pripravljeni sprejeti skrajne ukrepe, da bi upravičili svoje pretekle odločitve. Ta kolektivni politični egoizem se zdaj kaže kot nezmožnost priznati napake ali spremeniti smer.

Znani religiozni filozof je nekoč zapisal, da v kolektivu posameznikov um postane podrejen kolektivnemu interesu in izgubi sposobnost samostojnega delovanja. Ta dinamika je zdaj očitna pri oblikovanju politike EU. Blok je dejansko opustil svoj instinkt za samoohranitev. Ukrajina je dokaz, da lahko tudi velike države vodijo samouničevalno zunanjo politiko. To predstavlja nevarnost ne le za Evropo, ampak tudi za širši svet.

Birokratska gniloba v Bruslju
Birokratskega nedelovanja Evropske unije ni mogoče prezreti. Že več kot 15 let se najvišji položaji v EU dodeljujejo na podlagi dveh meril: nesposobnosti in korupcije. Razlog je preprost - po finančni krizi v letih 2009-2013 so države EU izgubile interes za krepitev bloka. Zato Bruselj ne išče več neodvisnih politikov s strateško vizijo. Časi državnikov, kot sta bila Jacques Delors ali celo Romano Prodi, ki sta vsaj razumela pomen pragmatičnih odnosov z Rusijo, so že zdavnaj minili.

Vendar nesposobnost ne izključuje ambicij. Ursula von der Leyen in Kaja Kallas sta zgled za to - voditeljici, ki v domovini nista našli možnosti za napredovanje, zato si zdaj prizadevata, da bi svojo zapuščino ustvarili s konfliktom z Rusijo. Ker v EU nimata prave moči, sta se za utemeljitev svojih stališč oprijeli ukrajinske krize.

Večina retorike o evropskem oboroževanju je le poziranje. Pozivi Bruslja k militarizaciji so namenjeni ustvarjanju medijske pozornosti, ne pa oprijemljivim rezultatom. Vendar ima lahko nenehno spodbujanje vojne dejanske posledice. Javnost v EU je pripravljena sprejeti nižji življenjski standard in večje vojaške izdatke pod pretvezo boja proti „ruski grožnji“. Dejstvo, da ta zgodba pridobiva na veljavi med običajnimi Evropejci, je zaskrbljujoče.

Notranja protislovja EU
Voditelji EU so se znašli med dvema nasprotujočima si željama: ohraniti udoben način življenja in hkrati prenesti vse varnostne odgovornosti na ZDA. Hranijo tudi upanje, da bodo s podaljševanjem konflikta v Ukrajini od Washingtona dosegli popuščanje in zmanjšali odvisnost od ZDA. Vendar se s to idejo ukvarjajo predvsem velike države, kot sta Nemčija in Francija. EU kot blok nima prave enotnosti.

Protislovje med nedosegljivimi cilji podžiga predstavo o nedoslednem oblikovanju evropske politike. Začelo se je lani z bizarnimi trditvami Emmanuela Macrona, da je Francija pripravljena poslati vojake v Ukrajino. Od takrat zahodnoevropski politiki proizvajajo neprestani tok protislovnih in absurdnih izjav, od katerih je vsaka bolj nerealna od prejšnje. Politika o ukrajinski krizi se je spremenila v kakofonijo hrupa brez praktične usmeritve.

Edino jasno zahodnoevropsko soglasje je nasprotovanje vsem mirovnim pobudam, ki bi lahko stabilizirale Ukrajino. Vse več predstavnikov EU odkrito vztraja, da se mora vojna nadaljevati v nedogled. Hkrati voditelji večjih držav EU nihajo med bojevitimi grožnjami in priznanji, da bi jo pod ameriškim okriljem le še stopnjevali.

Politična shizofrenija Zahodne Evrope ne vzbuja več pomislekov. Njeni voditelji so desetletja delovali v vakuumu in jih ni skrbelo, kako njihova dejanja dojemajo v tujini. V nasprotju z ZDA, ki včasih delujejo agresivno, da bi pokazale svojo moč, evropski politiki kažejo povsem drugačno patologijo, ki jo zaznamujeta distanciranost in brezbrižnost. Delujejo kot norci, ki se ne ozirajo na zunanje odzive.

Trumpova Amerika in evropska dilema
Tako elite EU kot tudi njeno prebivalstvo razumejo, da je pobegniti ameriškemu nadzoru nemogoče. Mnogi si na skrivaj želijo, da bi bilo drugače. Vendar bo novi pristop Donalda Trumpa k čezatlantskim odnosom najverjetneje veliko ostrejši od vsega doslej videnega. Kljub temu se evropske elite oklepajo upanja, da se bodo v nekaj letih na oblast vrnili demokrati in vzpostavili status quo.

Zato je strategija bloka preprosta: čim dlje podaljšati sedanje razmere. Evropski voditelji namreč nimajo pojma, kako bi ohranili svoje položaje, če bi bil mir z Rusijo ponovno vzpostavljen. V zadnjih dveh desetletjih Zahodna Evropa ni uspela rešiti nobenega od svojih perečih problemov. Ukrajinska kriza je le najnevarnejša manifestacija te dolgotrajne disfunkcije.

Politiki EU se še naprej sprašujejo: Kako lahko manevriramo, ne da bi morali resnično ukrepati? Ta pasivni pristop k upravljanju ni več le težava Evrope, temveč aktivno spodbuja konflikte in ogroža svetovno stabilnost.

Ta članek je bil prvič objavljen v časopisu Vzglyad, prevedla in uredila pa ga je ekipa RT.

==== Originalni prispevek https://www.rt.com/news/613949-eus-leadership-is-now-global-threat/ ====

9 Mar, 2025 20:35
The EU’s leaders are now a global threat
The bloc’s out of control elites can’t solve problems, so they keep creating new ones

By Timofey Bordachev, Programme Director of the Valdai Club

Western European politicians have long approached governance with a strategy of avoidance – always seeking the easiest way out while postponing real decisions. While this used to be a problem only for the region itself, today, its indecision is threatening global stability.

Europe’s current political landscape must be understood in the context of the dramatic shifts taking place in the United States. The continent’s political elites are not striving for strategic autonomy, nor are they preparing for a direct confrontation with its biggest state, Russia. Their primary concern is holding on to power. In pursuit of this goal, history has shown that elites will go to great lengths.

Recently, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov pointed out that, for the past 500 years, Europe has been the epicenter of global conflicts or their instigator. Today, its independent military potential is depleted – both economically and socially. To rebuild, Europe would need years of aggressive militarization, which would impoverish its citizens. Western European leaders seem determined to ensure the latter, but they are not yet ready for the former.

While the EU states may not be preparing for a direct military confrontation with Russia, their entanglement in Ukraine and its reliance on a failing strategy could escalate tensions unpredictably. Many Western European politicians have staked their careers on the survival of the Kiev regime, making them willing to take extreme measures to justify their past decisions. This collective political egoism is now manifesting as an inability to acknowledge mistakes or alter course.

A renowned religious philosopher once wrote that in a collective, the individual mind becomes subservient to the collective interest and loses the ability to act independently. This dynamic is now evident in EU policymaking. The bloc has effectively abandoned its instinct for self-preservation. Ukraine is proof that even large states can adopt self-destructive foreign policies. This poses dangers not just for Europe but for the wider world.

The bureaucratic rot in Brussels
The European Union’s bureaucratic dysfunction cannot be ignored. For over 15 years, top EU positions have been assigned based on two criteria: incompetence and corruption. The reason is simple – after the 2009-2013 financial crisis, EU states lost interest in strengthening the bloc. Consequently, Brussels no longer seeks independent-minded politicians with strategic vision. The days of statesmen like Jacques Delors or even Romano Prodi – who at least understood the importance of pragmatic relations with Russia – are long gone.

But incompetence does not preclude ambition. Ursula von der Leyen and Kaja Kallas exemplify this – leaders who, finding no avenues for career advancement back home, now seek to carve out their legacy through conflict with Russia. Since they have no real power within the EU, they latch onto the Ukraine crisis to justify their positions.

Much of the rhetoric about European rearmament is little more than posturing. Brussels’ calls for militarization are designed to generate media attention rather than produce tangible results. Yet, constant war-mongering can have real consequences. The EU public is being conditioned to accept lower living standards and increased military spending under the guise of countering the “Russian threat.” The fact that this narrative is gaining traction among ordinary Europeans is a worrying development.

The EU’s internal contradictions
EU leaders are now caught between two conflicting desires: maintaining their comfortable way of life while outsourcing all security responsibilities to the US. They also harbor hopes that by prolonging the Ukraine conflict, they can extract concessions from Washington and reduce dependence on the US. But this idea is primarily entertained by major countries like Germany and France. The EU, as a bloc, lacks any real unity.

The contradiction between unattainable goals fuels the spectacle of incoherent European policymaking. It was initiated last year by Emmanuel Macron’s bizarre claims that France was prepared to send troops to Ukraine. Since then, Western European politicians have produced a constant stream of contradictory and absurd statements, each more unrealistic than the last. Policy on the Ukraine crisis has devolved into a cacophony of noise with no practical direction.

The only clear Western European consensus is opposition to any peace initiative that might stabilize Ukraine. More and more EU representatives openly insist that the war must continue indefinitely. At the same time, the leaders of major EU states oscillate between bellicose threats and admissions that they would only escalate under American cover.

Western Europe’s political schizophrenia no longer raises eyebrows. For decades, its leaders have operated in a vacuum, unconcerned about how their actions are perceived abroad. Unlike the US, which sometimes acts aggressively to project strength, European politicians exhibit an entirely different pathology – one marked by detachment and indifference. They act like madmen, oblivious to external reactions.

Trump’s America and Europe’s dilemma
The EU’s elites, as well as its populations, understand that escaping American control is impossible. Many secretly wish it were otherwise. However, Donald Trump’s new approach to transatlantic relations is likely to be far harsher than anything seen before. Yet, European elites cling to the hope that, within a few years, the Democrats will return to power and restore the status quo.

The bloc’s strategy, therefore, is simple: prolong the current situation for as long as possible. This is because European leaders have no idea how to maintain their positions if peace with Russia is restored. Over the past two decades, Western Europe has consistently failed to solve any of its pressing problems. The Ukraine crisis is simply the most dangerous manifestation of this longstanding dysfunction.

EU politicians continue to ask themselves: How can we maneuver without having to take real action? This passive approach to governance is no longer just a problem for Europe – it is actively fueling conflicts and endangering global stability.

This article was first published by ‘Vzglyad’ newspaper and was translated and edited by the RT team.

==== Konec https://www.rt.com/news/613949-eus-leadership-is-now-global-threat/ ====

* * *

Hiša vedno zmaga: Navidezna „demokracija“ EU se kaže proti romunskemu Georgescuju
Pod smešno pretvezo so predsedniškemu kandidatu prepovedali udeležbo na volitvah. Ali je to prihodnja usoda celotnega bloka?

Tarik Cyril Amar, zgodovinar iz Nemčije, ki dela na univerzi Koç v Istanbulu, se ukvarja z Rusijo, Ukrajino in Vzhodno Evropo, zgodovino druge svetovne vojne, kulturno hladno vojno in politiko spomina

Calin Georgescu, winner of the annulled first round of Romania's presidential elections,

waves as he leaves a district court in Bucharest, March 5, 2025. © AP Photo/Vadim Ghirda

Gnili stari režim, ki mu obupno zmanjkuje poti, lahko prepoznate po tem, kako nesramne in transparentne so njegove metode zatiranja.

Po tem merilu mora biti Romunija in z njo EU na robu revolucije. Kajti res si je težko predstavljati hujši niz umazanih trikov, kot so bili uporabljeni za zatiranje najverjetnejšega zmagovalca naslednjih predsedniških volitev Calina Georgescuja.

Do zdaj je preganjanje Georgescuja s strani romunskega establišmenta (in EU) postalo že prava saga. Zadostuje kratek povzetek: Decembra lani je v prvem krogu romunskih predsedniških volitev zmagal Georgescu, uporniški nacionalistični in suverenistični kandidat presenečenja. Namesto drugega kroga, kot je predvideno z zakonom, se je romunski establišment zatekel k grobemu pravnemu boju: ustavno sodišče v Bukarešti je razveljavilo drugi krog, v katerem je imel Georgescu zelo dobre možnosti za zmago. Ali bolje rečeno, ker je imel Georgescu zelo dobre možnosti za zmago.

Izgovor, ki ga je sodišče uporabilo, je bil takrat smešen - uganite kaj? spet „rusko vmešavanje“ - in zdaj so morali celo zahodni osrednji mediji priznati, da so tako imenovani „dokazi“, spis, ki so ga sestavile romunske varnostne službe, slaba šala. Celo časopis Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, ki je trdna trdnjava nemške rusofobije, že dolgo priznava, da je trditev o ruskem vmešavanju „mit“ (beri: laž): „Vladajoči razred v Bukarešti je z ruskim strašilom poskrbel, da bi odvrnil pozornost od neuspeha svojih malih iger moči - in da bi imel izgovor za razveljavitev volitev, ki mu niso ustrezale.“

Še huje (da, v EU-Romuniji lahko naredijo še kaj hujšega), Georgescujevo uspešno kampanjo na družbenih omrežjih, ki je bila uporabljena kot dokaz proti Georgescu, so v resnici financirali njegovi politični nasprotniki. Njihov načrt je bil uvrstiti ga v drugi krog, kjer bi ga lahko premagali. Ko se je izkazalo, da je nepredvidljivo priljubljen, in je ta načrt porušil, so volitve preklicali.

Ni presenetljivo, da so številni Romuni spregledali to šarado in se še bolj zbrali za zatiranega kandidata. Zato je imel Georgescu, če že ne drugega, še večje možnosti za zmago na nadomestnih volitvah, predvidenih za maj, kar so jasno pokazale ankete: vodil je z več kot 41 % pred najbližjim nasprotnikom, ki je imel manj kot 19 %.

To je bilo seveda preveč za dolgoletno in globoko skorumpirano romunsko oblast. Ker so bili podatki iz anket pravkar objavljeni, je glavni volilni organ zdaj ponovno prepovedal Georgescuja. Temeljno načelo je preprosto: Izgleda, da boš zmagal pošteno in pravično. Toda prvo pravilo kluba demokracije EU se glasi: vedno zmagamo mi. Izstopite.

Georgescu se lahko še vedno pritoži. Toda uganite, kje: na istem ustavnem sodišču, ki ga je uporabilo za to, da ga je spravilo na kolena, ko je prvič zmagal. Malo možnosti, da bo imel pošteno obravnavo.

Nekaj pa naj se že odpravi: Georgescu je bil na splošno označen za skrajno desničarja. Zagotovo je nacionalist in zagotovo ne spada v moj klub, levičarje. Toda vse to je nepomembno. Povsem nepomembno. Ima pravico kandidirati na volitvah. Če njegovi nasprotniki ne marajo njegove politike, ga morajo premagati na volišču, ne pa s pravnimi sredstvi in jasno instrumentaliziranimi obtožbami.

Te obtožbe vključujejo dvomljive povezave, hitro in svobodno igranje z nedavno romunsko zgodovino in manj kot pregledno ravnanje z denarjem. In kaj? Velika stvar: Tudi če bi se vsaka posamezna obtožba izkazala za resnično, je dejstvo, da če bi se enaki standardi uporabljali povsod in za vse v Romuniji in EU ali njeni najljubši navidezni „demokraciji“, Zelenskega Ukrajini, potem bi padli veliki deli sedanjih „elit“.

Italijo dobesedno vodi neofašistična vlada, Ukrajina pa ni prežeta z neofašizmom, temveč s staro dobro, trdno različico druge svetovne vojne. In ne začnite z AfD v Nemčiji in Nacionalnim shodom v Franciji, od katerih si - kljub vsem že tako globoko nedemokratičnim „požarnim zidovom“, s katerimi se soočata - nihče ne bi upal preprosto izločiti z volitev. Lahko bi našteli še več primerov, a bistvo bi moralo biti jasno: četudi Georgescuja lahko označimo za „skrajno desnico“, EU, ki ji pripada Romunija, že dolgo sprejema tovrstno ideologijo.

Pravi razlog, zakaj je bil Georgescu za zdaj odstranjen, je seveda nekaj drugega, ali bolje rečeno dve stvari: Prvič, je populistični (v mojem leksikonu je to, mimogrede, pohvala) izzivalec elite tako v svoji državi kot v EU. Drugič, drznil si je podvomiti o smotrnosti spreminjanja Romunije v ogromno Natovo oporišče in s tem v velikansko tarčo. Vse drugo je izgovor. Ne nasedajte mu.

Georgescujevi podporniki demonstrirajo in se upirajo. Imajo prav. Tudi tisti, ki trenutno vodijo ZDA, so se večkrat postavili na njegovo stran. J. D. Vance je opozoril Evropejce, naj ne pretiravajo v Romuniji ali drugje. Elon Musk je nov romunski napad na volitve označil za „norega“. Glede tega ima tudi on prav, čeprav je Politico glede tega histeričen.

Vendar pa je dejstvo, da so romunske oblasti, vsekakor s podporo EU, šle tako daleč, na nek način slabo znamenje: zdi se, da so Evropejci ob tako ali tako trhlih odnosih med ZDA in Evropo zdaj pripravljeni s prstom pokazati na to, kar jim rečejo njihovi stari gospodarji v Washingtonu, vsaj ko gre za razveljavljanje volitev, zatiranje demokracije ali seveda za nadaljevanje neumne in krvave zahodne posredniške vojne proti Rusiji prek Ukrajine. Tako naprej, Evropa: končno odkrivaš svojo sposobnost uporništva proti ZDA, le da si še slabša.

Georgescu ima prav: To ni „le“ romunska zadeva, ampak še en dogodek, ki določa trende za celotno EU-Evropo. Po obsežnih manipulacijah, ki so jih uporabili v Franciji za oblikovanje bizarnih vlad, da bi izključili tako populistično desnico kot levico in ne odražali glasov, po brezsramnem „požarnem zidu“ (proti AfD) in verjetno tudi odkritem ponarejanju (proti BSW Sarah Wagenknecht) v Nemčiji smo zdaj prišli do faze neposrednega, odkritega zatiranja volitev.

Romunija bo verjetno napoved prihodnosti EU. Brez žalitve, ampak kakšna ironija. Edino upanje je, da prihodnost Evrope dejansko ni enaka prihodnosti EU. Evropa bo morda imela prihodnost le, če je ne bo imela EU.

==== Originalni prispevek https://www.rt.com/news/613982-romania-georgescu-eu-democracy/ ====

10 Mar, 2025 17:08
The house always wins: The EU’s sham ‘democracy’ is on show against Romania’s Georgescu
The presidential frontrunner has been banned from elections under a laughable pretense. Is this the future fate of the entire bloc?

By Tarik Cyril Amar, a historian from Germany working at Koç University, Istanbul, on Russia, Ukraine, and Eastern Europe, the history of World War II, the cultural Cold War, and the politics of memory
@tarikcyrilamar
tarikcyrilamar.substack.com
tarikcyrilamar.com

One way you can recognize a rotten Ancien Regime desperately running out of road is by how boorish and transparent its methods of repression get.

By that standard, Romania and with it the EU must be on the verge of revolution. Because it is really hard to imagine a cruder set of dirty tricks than what has been deployed there to suppress the most likely winner of the next presidential election, Calin Georgescu.

By now, the hounding of Georgescu by the Romanian establishment (and that of the EU) is quite a saga. A short recap will do: Last December, Georgescu, an insurgent nationalist-sovereignist surprise candidate, won the first round of Romania’s presidential elections. Instead of holding the second round, as foreseen by law, the Romanian establishment resorted to crass lawfare: Bucharest’s constitutional court cancelled the run-off, which Georgescu had very good chances of winning. Or rather, because Georgescu had very good chances of winning.

The pretext the court used was ludicrous then – guess what? “Russian interference,” again – and by now even Western mainstream media have had to acknowledge that the so-called “evidence,” a file cobbled together by the Romanian security services, is a bad joke. Even the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, stately stalwart of German Russophobia, has long admitted that the claim of Russian meddling was a “myth” (read: lie): “The governing class in Bucharest has made a show of the Russian bogeyman to distract from the failure of its little power games – and to have a pretext for annulling elections that did not suit it.”

Worse (yes, they can do even worse in EU-Romania), Georgescu’s successful social media campaign, which was used as evidence against Georgescu was, in reality, financed by his political opponents. Their plan was to promote him into the second round where they would then be able to beat him. When he proved unpredictably popular and upset that scheme, they cancelled the election.

Unsurprisingly, many Romanians saw through this charade and rallied even more behind the suppressed candidate. Hence, Georgescu was, if anything, even more likely to win the replacement elections scheduled for May, as polls clearly indicated: leading with over 41% over his closest opponent, who had less than 19%.

That was too much to bear, of course, for Romania’s long-suffering and deeply corrupt establishment. With those poll figures just out, as it happened, the main election authority has now banned Georgescu, again. The underlying principle is simple: You look like you are going to win fair and square. But rule number one of EU democracy club is: we always win. Out you go.

Georgescu, it is true, can still appeal. But guess where: to that same constitutional court that was used to kneecap him when he was winning the first time. Fat chance he’ll have a fair hearing.

Let’s get one thing out of the way: Georgescu has been widely characterized as far-right. He certainly is a nationalist and definitely does not belong to my club, the Left. But all of the above is irrelevant. Strictly irrelevant. He has a right to stand for elections. If his opponents dislike his politics, they have to beat him at the ballot box, not through lawfare and by clearly instrumentalized charges.

These charges include dubious associations, playing fast and loose with recent Romanian history, and being less than transparent about money. And so what? Big deal: Even if every single accusation should turn out to be true, the fact is that if the same standards were applied everywhere and to everyone in Romania and the EU or its favorite sham “democracy”, Zelensky’s Ukraine, then broad swathes of the incumbent “elites” would fall.

Italy, literally, has a government led by a neo-fascist; Ukraine is shot through with not even neo-fascism but the good old sturdy World War Two variant. And don’t get me started on the AfD in Germany and the National Rally in France, neither of which – in spite all the already deeply undemocratic “firewalling” they face – anyone would dare to simply kick out of elections. We could enumerate more examples, but the gist should be clear: even if Georgescu can be characterized as “far right,” the EU, to which Romania belongs, has long accommodated this type of ideology.

The real reason why Georgescu has been eliminated, for now, is, of course, something else, or rather two things: First, he is a populist (that’s praise in my lexicon, by the way) challenger to the elite in both his own country and the EU. Secondly, he has dared question the wisdom of turning Romania into a massive NATO base and thus a giant target. Everything else is pretext. Don’t fall for it.

Georgescu’s supporters are demonstrating and resisting. They are right. Those currently running the US have also come out on his side repeatedly. J.D. Vance warned the Europeans not to overdo it in Romania, or elsewhere. Elon Musk has called the new Romanian attack on the elections “crazy.” About this one, he, too, is right, even if Politico is hysterical about it.

Yet, in a way, the fact that the Romanian authorities, certainly with EU backing, have gone so far is a bad sign: it seems that with the US-Europe relationship on the rocks anyhow, the Europeans are now willing to thumb their noses at what their old overlords in Washington tell them, at least, when it’s about cancelling elections, suppressing democracy or, of course, continuing the moronic and bloody Western proxy war via Ukraine against Russia. Way to go, Europe: You are discovering your ability to rebel against the US, at very long last, only to be even worse.

Georgescu is right: This is not “merely” a Romanian affair, but yet another trend-setting event for all of EU-Europe. After the massive manipulations used in France to build bizarre governments to shut out both the populist right and left and not reflect the vote, the brazen “firewalling” (against the AfD) and probably outright falsifications (against the BSW of Sarah Wagenknecht) in Germany, now we have reached the stage of direct, open election suppression.

Romania is likely to be a harbinger of the future of the EU. No offense, but what an irony. The only hope is that Europe’s future is, actually, not the same as that of the EU. Indeed, Europe may only have a future if the EU will not.

==== Konec https://www.rt.com/news/613982-romania-georgescu-eu-democracy/ ====

* Prevodi narejeni s pomočjo www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version) *