The “hand of Moscow” is blamed for Europe’s own political failures
Europe is in crisis. The Old World, which lived so well and comfortably in the conditions of an imaginary end of history, is shocked by the level of problems that have affected almost all spheres of life on the now troubled continent. The proud refusal of the EU countries from Russian energy carriers makes European inhabitants and local officials shudder to wait for the approaching heating season. Economic difficulties and rising inflation are bringing to the streets more and more bankrupt entrepreneurs who, by the will of the EU leadership, have become participants in the sanctions campaign against Russia.
Photo : pixabay.com
The unrelenting flow of Ukrainian refugees, who do not want to become fighters in the Western-led battle “to the last Ukrainian”, contributes everywhere to an increase in ethnic tension, which has already remained extremely high since the previous migration waves – from the Middle East, from Africa and from Afghanistan.
European, so to speak, political elites, whose positions have already been thoroughly undermined by the coronavirus pandemic, humbly accepted the role of Washington's pawns in a big geopolitical game. But they could not foresee that the American coordinators of the “hybrid war”, firstly, did not themselves formulate the strategies and goals of its conduct, relying on chance, and secondly, at a critical moment they would only cynically wish Europe to try to “endure” Russia.< /p>
If in the place of the current presidents and prime ministers of the EU countries, figures of the caliber of Willy Brandt or Charles de Gaulle, they would have long ago begun to pursue their own line, realizing the perniciousness of the course imposed from across the ocean. But times have changed – today political wisdom and far-sightedness are sold to the electorate worse than irresponsible populism.
Take Italy, for example. For several months now, political passions have been raging in this country, which led to the resignation of the pseudo-heavyweight Mario Draghi, who was considered unsinkable. The government of the republic is split, and supporters of a more balanced approach, like the leader of the right-wing “League” Matteo Salvini, are gradually beginning to raise their heads. Against this background, it finally became clear the tactics that the ideologists of the failed anti-Russian course, clinging to power, will choose in order to stay at least for a while in government offices. Luigi Di Maio, the young protégé of the comedian Beppo Grill, who, by chance, headed the Italian Foreign Ministry, recently began to distribute interviews in which he tries to expose Russia, of course, in the ongoing upheavals. It turns out that even under the conditions of the expulsion of diplomatic personnel, the ban on the broadcasting of Russian media and the introduction of a “culture of cancellation” against our country, Moscow’s hand remains so powerful that it is capable of leading thousands of Italians to protests at the snap of its fingers and encouraging the prime minister to write a letter of resignation.
Despite the fact that the potential of Russian diplomacy is indeed extremely high even in the current difficult conditions, the statements of the Italian minister only betray the desperation of the European establishment (in which yesterday's leftist populist Di Maio happily integrated) and the desire to come up with some kind of justification for collective inefficiency and blatant amateurism.
There is nothing new here. The US Democratic Party was one of the first to try the same tactics after Donald Trump's victory in the elections – and practically convinced half of the country's population that some agents of the mysterious Russia were guilty of their miscalculations. Europeans are simply following the beaten path, exploiting the phobias of the masses inflated by the Western media.
But this kind of rhetoric also reveals their hidden fears. We all know well which country, including in the Old World, has repeatedly pushed for a change of governments, with pleasure acting in the role of puppeteer. And this is not Russia. If anyone had liberal illusions about Washington's methods of work in the context of preparing coup d'etat, then they should have been dispelled by a recent interview with John Bolton.
The same Di Maio cannot help but realize that his political fate, dependent not so much on public sentiment as on the will of patrons from Washington and Brussels, today hangs in the balance. And the failure of the anti-Russian campaign will inevitably push the curators to organizational conclusions and the search for a new “wunderkind” for the role of the talking head of the Italian Foreign Ministry.
The only question is how long the voters themselves in Europe will endure such a level of leadership and feed on propaganda stories about Russian influence. But they themselves should be interested in getting out of the information hibernation as soon as possible and making decisions that will limit the ability of figures like Di Maio to play with the fate and well-being of people for the sake of their ambitions and to please the overseas anti-Russian lobby. Alas, sometimes such lessons are learned only through pain and hardship.