[ad_1]
Diplomacy Week in Brussels. The EU, NATO and the G-7 hold talks and seek means against the Russian aggressor. The first meeting was that of EU Foreign Ministers. The decisions made are modest.
The repeated calls of the brave Ukrainian president for help from the EU and NATO become more and more urgent and desperate: more weapons, a tougher embargo against Russia, more evacuation corridors, no-fly zone, fighter jets! The responses of Europeans and the West are the same and increasingly powerless before the brutality and antihumanism of the dictator in the Kremlin in the fight against Ukraine.
EU foreign and defense ministers do not see themselves in a position to further tighten sanctions. Yes, defensive weapons will be sent if they are still in military depots. But a military engagement in Ukrainian airspace or on the ground is out of the question, because that would mean war across Europe.
Lack of practical tools
Top diplomats and EU member states are meanwhile defining Vladimir Putin as he really is: a war criminal. The images from Ukraine of children in tears, of destroyed cities are quite touching. But neither the EU foreign ministers nor the heads of state and government of NATO countries meeting this week in Brussels have the practical tools to stop this madness.
The sanctions imposed affect Putin and Russian society only in the long or medium term. NATO cannot take away Putin’s weapons. Even an immediate embargo on gas, oil or coal Russia would face for some time. And Russian energy-dependent countries, such as Germany, would inflict great economic damage on themselves, which could jeopardize economic achievement, well-being, and ultimately solidarity with refugees. The EU has therefore rightly not accepted such a step. Breaking away from Russian supplies as quickly as possible is the smartest way, and not even easy.
Many questions, few answers
EU foreign ministers did not provide satisfactory answers to questions about the red lines, such as what the consequences would be if Putin used chemical weapons, wiped out Ukrainian cities, or even attacked Moldova and Georgia after Ukraine. Only one thing is clear: In the event that NATO territory is attacked, the alliance will respond. This is the promise, but would it really be fulfilled? They have to believe this realistically in the Baltics, in Poland, in Romania, otherwise nothing can hold the Kremlin dictator and his army.
The “strategic compass” defined by the foreign ministers is more of a paper tiger against the backdrop of the current war in Ukraine. Greater military independence and the EU’s strategic role in the world are honorable goals, but work of the future. It is now a question of arming, of strengthening the EU’s defense capability, of making the threat credible. Even these are plans that do not help now and here, much less the people in Ukraine.
Who can get rid of the tyrant?
The goal of the EU and NATO should be an immediate change of the Moscow regime to stop Putin’s war machine. Where are the secret services and special commandos, who are able to get rid of a brazen tyrant like Putin? Compared to the Soviet leadership in the Cold War, Vladimir Putin is truly unpredictable and unscrupulous. At that time the balance of intimidation worked, because it was known, whoever crosses the red line first, dies second. But does intimidation work today? Or is it too late for Putin? These are issues that the EU, NATO and the G7 will have to deal with this week. So far no one was able to send in the perfect solution, which is not strange
top channel
[ad_2]
Source link
