Latest news with #JacquesDelors
Russia Today
09-03-2025
- Politics
- Russia Today
The EU's leadership is now a global threat
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 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. 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. 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 article was first published by 'Vzglyad' newspaper and was translated and edited by the RT team.
Telegraph
24-02-2025
- Politics
- Telegraph
The migration crisis is killing off Europe's border-free travel dream
Is there a method of travel which conjures more romantic images than the sleeper train? From the glory days of the Orient Express to the majesty of the Caledonian Sleeper, many travellers can't help but feel a flicker of excitement at the thought of nodding off in your spacious couchette as the world passes you by. It was that blissful feeling I was chasing last summer, as my sleeper train left Linz in Austria just before midnight to return to Brussels. Shortly after I had dozed off, however, came a sudden knock on my private cabin door. Assuming it was an overenthusiastic service call – they're very attentive on the ÖBB Nightjet – at first I ignored them. Then came the word that brought me out of my slumber: 'Polizei!'. Had I stumbled into a murder mystery a la Strangers on a Train? Not quite. After finally gathering my senses enough to pull on the previous day's clothes, I was told the real reason for the disruption: the German police needed to see my passport. It was irritating, yes, but it was also exactly the sort of thing that shouldn't happen when you're travelling in Schengen, the EU's much-celebrated border-free travel zone which stretches across 27 member states (the exceptions being Ireland and Cyprus), as well as Switzerland, Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein. Departing from Schengen Schengen's history stretches back to 1985, when EU leaders gathered in the eponymous village in Luxembourg to finalise plans for a single travel zone championed by Jacques Delors, the European Commission president whose enthusiasm for a 'federalising Europe' famously drew the ire of Margaret Thatcher. But for all the EU's trumpeting of Schengen, the scheme had only been in place for a few months before French president Jacques Chirac would suspend the agreement entirely, instigating strict border checks following terrorist attacks in Paris and Lyon. Seen as a one-off exception at the time, it would go on to set a precedent that would become familiar. Over the past 30 years, EU countries have 'temporarily' departed from the Schengen agreement some 300 times, imposing border checks for everything from G8 summits to the Covid pandemic. But perhaps the biggest trigger of all has been the factor which continues to dominate European politics: the migration crisis. As of February 2025, ten Schengen countries (Austria, Bulgaria, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Slovenia and Sweden) have instituted emergency checks on at least some of their borders, citing 'high levels of irregular migration' and the enhanced security threats that come with it. There are currently allowances for checks on 27 separate borders. How many illegal migrants has Germany intercepted by sending its border police onto sleeper trains like the ÖBB Nightjet on which I was travelling? Unsurprisingly, the authorities in Berlin don't provide numbers for every method of transport, but they do say that the wider web of checks has helped them turn back 47,000 people from its borders in the past year. Leaving the security and humanitarian aspects of the migration crisis to one side, what does the picking apart of Schengen mean for those perfectly-legal travellers who just want to enjoy a stress-free holiday travelling across the continent? Ask those who travel most regularly across Europe and the same word comes up again and again: inconvenience. 'I have had my documents checked far too often in the past couple of years,' says John Worth, a rail enthusiast who has crossed over 288 borders in Europe via his project #CrossBorderRail. 'There is a clear hierarchy: buses are checked the most, followed by trains, and then cars and airplanes are controlled the least.' Political theatre It isn't just that the checks are irritating, Mr Worth argues, but they're also not particularly effective at fulfilling their stated purpose – i.e. to stop people crossing borders without permission. 'They might pick up clueless people who have the wrong papers, but any organised criminal could get around them quite easily by travelling in other ways.' As for the prospect for delays, the major train operators on the continent don't publish extensive data – although passengers who are delayed for more than 60 minutes are usually entitled to a partial refund. ÖBB, the state-backed Austrian company which operates Nightjet, said that it cooperated with any border checks requested by the relevant authorities. 'Despite the Schengen Treaty, ID checks are conducted at some internal EU borders,' they say. 'Whether they actually take place is up to the authorities. As a rail company, we cooperate with the authorities and inform our passengers. However, this can also lead to delays in operation.' Could these kinds of checks fall away over time? Given the parlous state of European politics and the continued pertinence of migration, most experts aren't holding their breath on that front. Some see the border checks are partly a form of political theatre, intended to win over voters whose concerns about migration might otherwise lead them to drift rightwards. Those who embroiled themselves in EU politics during the Brexit years may wonder how such checks don't undermine the EU's cherished 'freedom of movement'. In fact, EU law allows for checks to be imposed as a last resort. 'Foreseeable events for instigating checks permit an initial six-month period, with the possibility to extend in exceptional circumstances, up to a total of two years,' says Andreia Ghimis, from the Brussels office of the global immigration-focused law firm Fragomen. For exceptional situations, she adds, there is the possibility of extending for another year. But it's up to the EU Commission to enforce the rules, which it has been reluctant to do. 'While the Commission has repeatedly emphasised its goal of safeguarding free movement with the Schengen Area, it has not yet launched infringement procedures against countries that have extended their border checks multiple times,' Ms Ghimis says. It may not be what you wanted to hear before embarking on your dream sleeper train trip, but it looks like border checks may be here to stay – even if they should at least be only mildly inconveniencing. 'In my experience, you may get a small delay entering Germany from Austria or one of the other major borders, but it shouldn't take too long if you have everything ready,' says Jon Worth. As with most things when it comes to travel, the best course of action is to be prepared: keep your passport to hand. And keep your fingers crossed that your fellow passengers have done the same.
