Can NATO membership be separated from EU aspirations?

Growing up in Greece, I often came across the widespread slogan from the country's Communist Party (KKE); "EEC and NATO, the same syndicate".

Back then, I was slightly dismissive about it, not wanting to side with neither dominant ideology of Greek politics; left or right.

However, one cannot fail to notice that in recent years, this is very much the case.

Following the 2004 big-bang EU enlargement, we also had a NATO expansion to the East. Many of the new member states in either block, have been former USSR republics, or belonged to the Warsaw Pact. Excluding Cyprus and Malta, all continental central and Eastern European new members, have joined both organizations.

Something that we did not necessarily witnessed in previous EU enlargements. When Ireland and then later Austria, Sweden or Finland joined the union, they were not encouraged to become a member of the NATO alliance. In fact, none of them ever joined.

Since 2004 though, the trend of a joined EU/NATO membership for all Europe's eastern nations prevails. The problem is, that many have strong ties with Russia still, or are considered to be in the Russian sphere of influence, by the Russian elites.

In addition, some of them-like Ukraine, have a substantial Russian and Russian-speaking population. So if Europe is serious about engulfing and including these countries in its institutions, how will this affect its relations with its biggest neighbor and a key trade partner?

Both NATO and the EEC, later to be reformed into the EU that we know today, were born after the disastrous WW2. In order to keep the Soviet threat and influence out of Western Europe, our leaders aligned our nations with USA and Canada, forming one of the world's most formidable blocks and military alliances.

The EEC however, was formed out of a vision and idea, to permanently unite our continent, integrating it to a certain extend, that it could never go to war with itself again. Since its creation and step by step, Europe has morphed into a kind of confederation.

It has taken some very bold actions to integrate its members' economies with the creation of the euro and the single market. It has become the world's biggest trade block, although it lacks the political uniformity still, to become a serious world power.

Yet, not all are as rosy as expected in both organizations. The EU has just lost one of its oldest members-the UK, and it seems reluctant to continue integrating, constantly bickering with itself and among its members; sadly, it is always about money.

On the other hand, many do not see the point of NATO anymore. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact, the alliance tries to redefine itself and justify its purpose. Even the French President Emmanuel Macron has stated last year, that the alliance is becoming "brain-dead".

So what is the point of keep expanding it, since Europe does not face any military threats nowadays. If it is just to annoy Russia, it is a very petty excuse.

I am aware that many of the former USSR and Warsaw Pact members, are wary about Russian influence in their countries and they need support to limit it. But there is a difference between becoming more independent from your former ruler, than giving in to Russo-phobia and hysteria.

Besides, a number of them lately, have failed to maintain their pro-European momentum and core EU values, opting to slide back-oh the irony- to a more authoritarian government. Their anti-Russian sentiment, is masking perhaps a blind nationalism together with financial interests.

In order to gain the favor and some cash from the US, in exchange for military and arms sales and the establishment of expensive missiles and defense systems, many Eastern European countries are rushing to join NATO.

Make no mistake, USA accounts for over one third of the global arms exports by itself. In addition, other NATO members, like France and Germany, also rely heavily on sales from the same industry. Limiting military expenditure in Europe, would seriously harm their economies and no president of theirs, will ever actively seek such goal in his/her term.

However, even the USA itself is lately tired of financing and "protecting" countries that not even its President can name. So all the expansion efforts seem meaningless, unless we still think that Russia is out to destroy Europe.

It is no secret the two sides have been increasingly at loggerheads over a number of issues: Ukraine, Georgia, espionage, oil and gas prices and pipes, Syria. It is slightly ridiculous at this stage and the blame falls in both sides.

Both Russia and the US-with the still weak and patronizing European governments, fail to accept that the world has changed and does not, plus it should not evolve around their bickering anymore. It is not viable for countries to have to chose either, instead of establishing constructive relations with both, to a certain extend.

Yet the Russians desperately want to maintain their "sphere of influence" and restore their status as a super power. The West has exactly the same complex and seeks to keep Russia down, preventing it from ever recovering fully financially, attacking its economy with sanctions, slandering and engaging in anti-Russian propaganda and establishing missiles across their European borders.

Is it any wonder why then Russia, turns up its espionage and misinformation efforts, attacking Europe anyway it can? If we keep pointing our weapons towards Russia, they will do the same to us. In addition, no one in the West is realizing that the more we push Russian away, China will be more than happy to welcome it.

Russia will never go away geographically, it will always be on our doorstep. And if we ever decide to allow Ukraine in the EU, it is not wise to keep aggravating our relationship with Moscow. Ukraine can join the EU, but perhaps they should refrain from joining NATO altogether and opt for a more Finnish approach to the West.

They can act as a buffer zone between the two "spheres of influence", or even better, a bridge. In addition, as it has been already suggested by President Macron, Europe should form its own military defense mechanism, which although will maintain its ties with USA and Canada, it will become more autonomous.

New EU member states, such as Serbia, Ukraine and Georgia, won't be required to join NATO, just as Sweden or Austria have not, thus keeping US missiles and interests away from Russia, partially appeasing them.

It remains to be seen then, if the Russians will be happy with such arrangements and engage to an updated relationship with Europe. If they insist on keeping Ukraine and other countries away from a new EU, then the blame will be entirely theirs from then on.

The time of bullying countries into our "sphere" is bygone, we are heading towards a new reality; that of a multipolar, global economy with no left-right division lines, rather nationalist/isolationist versus a more open, globalized society and economy.

If any nation state is to make any impact and increase its influence, it will have to rely on diplomacy, trade and openness, rather military, missiles, espionage and cold war practices. And that is something that all three-Europe, USA and Russia must consider.

“Europe should reflect on racial inequality too”.

Philly Mag

Since the 25^th of May and the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis, the African American who succumbed whilst in police custody, yet another round of race inequality related violence and protests has erupted across the US.

One by one, most major American cities saw marches, riots and even looting and destruction of private and public property. The death of one man, revisited an ongoing issue in the US society, that of deep-rooted racial inequality and discrimination.

Soon enough the movement saw support in European cities and the world. Similar marches in support of George Floyd, against US police brutality and for racial equality and justice, were held across our continent.

One would think why Europeans would be mobilized, to protest police abuse of power in another country. However, we must never forget how Europe aspires to become a society similar to that of USA, plus in addition that our continent is already by large a multiracial continent.

Europe was modeled and inspired by its closest ally, the US after WW2. One by one, European nations saw an influx of immigrants, both from within and outside our continent. The most developed and rich countries, like France and Britain, have become multiracial since the ‘50s.

This trend continues until today, with all EU nations having a proportion of their citizens originating from another continent. But if the US, a nation that was established as a multiracial, multi-ethnic society a bit over than two centuries ago, still struggles to solve its own racial inequality issues, what chance does Europe has in succeeding where America fails?

Additionally, Europe is still comprised by nation states and its citizens’ sense of nationhood based on ethnic background, is much more prominent than in the US. And if we look at how we still struggle to fully integrate our own native ethnic minorities, like the Roma people, the future for Europe’s social equality does not look bright either.

It is time to acknowledge our own race problem. Are we conforming to the image and standards we are trying to promote to the world, or are we floundering? Perhaps European societies are also highly hypocritical about and towards their migrant communities.

We are happy to have someone serve us at a restaurant or clean after us in a hotel, look after our needs in a hospital or work to build our homes and collect our food in the fields. However, what happens to these people if they lose their jobs, they get sick and in need of a friend or social security?  

Europe is not unacquainted to immigrant ghettos. Most European capitals have them and we witnessed a fair share of violence in the past. But we do not like to openly discuss about it.

Largely it is because of our politicians’ lack of will and action, yet the responsibility also falls on each one of us. How we treat our migrants, is not only under the state’s authority and control.

We can also be the employers, colleagues, customers, the roommates, schoolmates, or neighbors to every George Floyd, across Europe. How we treat or interact with them, or how do we protest when we see an injustice being done upon them, will make a huge difference in their lives.

We should be doing some soul searching too, to establish if we are seriously ready to live in a multiracial society, or we just tolerate it because it is socially unacceptable not to. Perhaps we have allowed Europe to become multi-ethnic, just out of a complex for the crimes committed in our colonial past, or simply out of need of cheap labor.

But we do not wish to truly reform the laws of our countries, nor our mentality and attitude towards migrants, to ensure social justice and integration for all. If that is the case, then incidents like what is happening in the US right now, will also become a European norm.

That is why this is a great chance for our continent to ponder on its future and make sure it learns from America’s failures. Either that is police criminality against migrants, lack of jobs and educational opportunities, inequality of income and social exclusion.

Another issue that we must observe, is how these protests are being held or portrayed by the media. Scenes of looting, damage of private property and violence towards policemen or individuals of another race, are highly disturbing.

One may accuse the media or the US government of trying to dilute the seriousness or intentions of such protests, however there is no excuse for grasping such opportunity to steal from a private vendor.

I cannot recall, Martin Luther King or Rosa Parks condoning the theft of three pairs of expensive shoes, to justify their cause. They must have been way angrier or in despair than the modern civil rights activists, they were campaigning during the ‘50s, when America was still a largely segregated and unequal society.

However, they kept their cause dignified. It is the responsibility of each and one of the protesters, to remind themselves that this is not the time for pettiness and opportunism, they do not do any justice to the memory of George Floyd. Plus, they are damaging their reputation as a movement. 

Europe is watching and the future of all people of color, ethnic minorities, and immigrant communities on both sides of the Atlantic, could be affected by the outcome of such civil unrest movement.

If they fail to make any difference again this time or allow their government to portray them as anarchists and looters, then both America and in extend Europe, will see the perpetuation of stereotyping of black people; and this time, they will have a share of the responsibility.

“Α Frugal Europe is self-defeating and perpetuates a disappointing trend.”

On the 19^th of May, the French President Emmanuel Macron, and the German Chancellor Angela Merkel, jointly announced a 500 billion-euro Covid-19 aid package.

The initiative got the EU Commission’s support and approval, with its President Ursula von der Leyen announcing a 750 billion-euro aid package two days ago, 500 of those being grants and only 250 being made available as loans, after the “Frugal Four’s” objections.

The group of the four nations, comprised by the Netherlands, Sweden, Denmark, and Austria, have been mobilized to block Macron’s and Merkel’s proposal, since its announcement last week.

They fear that it will open the door to debt mutualization, plus they object to offer help “for free” as they see it. From their point of view, financial help should be attached to terms and conditions, payback with an interest of course.

What we can get from their stance is that the UK was not the only member state acting as a roadblock to closer European integration. Now that is gone, the cover of many states that were hiding behind British euro-skepticism is being blown away.

Their interests are not for the common good, rather their own and only. Debt mutualization is inevitable when sharing a single currency, the euro. That was the plan, that is what the EU’s forefathers dreamed and aimed, a single currency that would lead to a European Federation.

Additionally, the current crisis was not caused by any national mismanagement, or corruption and it has affected everyone equally. Even Germany and the Netherlands will benefit from the 500 billion grants, as they have been badly affected by the corona virus outbreak.

If these countries, two of which are euro members already and one-Sweden, which is obliged to join by their accession treaty, yet they are dragging their feet for 30 years, are not happy with this goal, or just do not share it any longer, they can follow Britain and leave.

In the past they blamed Greece, now they have a problem with Italy and Spain, in the future if they can continue with this demeanor, who they will have to blame? Most likely it will be Bulgaria and Croatia, two countries about to join the euro within the next 2-3 years.

Bulgaria has already been blocked by the Netherlands from joining the Schengen area, so the Dutch are not making themselves too popular these days in EU. They are scapegoating weaker nations to excuse their financial nationalism and self-serving interests.

Ten years ago, their finance minister Jeroen Dijsselbloem acted like a Spanish Inquisitor towards Greece, demanding the country to open its financial books and records, for the Troika to examine. 

Greece ended up even more indebted with consecutive bailouts, and together with Ireland, Portugal and Cyprus they were forced to bear the burden of saving the European banks, which mainly were German and French, and bailing out the euro-zone.

Europe’s periphery in other words, became fiscal dumping ground for euro-zone banks’ debt. Now the Dutch refuse to share the debt burden, while previously they were happy forcing others to do so.

Perhaps we could also now demand them to allow us to have a close look into their finances, and see how many millions in lost taxes from other countries they earn, while acting as a tax haven and then we will see who’s money it is to give.

The justification for their actions back then was that Greece lied about its debt to enter the euro-zone. Well I am sorry, it is highly unlikely that the rest of European leadership did not know about this already and in addition, that Greece is the only nation that acted in such manner.

Alternatively, we could ask every member to allow EU institutions to scrutinize closer their finances, as they should. However, I am sure it will not be Greece objecting to this, rather Germany, the Netherlands and other richer EU member states. And usually, it is the prosperous nations that break EU laws first.

Maybe it is about time for European leaders. to tell the truth to their citizens about EU budget fees and the benefits of their membership for their countries. When Greece joined, in fact whenever one less developed country becomes a member, richer nations buy up most of their resources and assets.

Since the ‘80s and Greece’s admission, most of the country’s industries have passed into German, French and other countries’ hands. So, while the Netherlands like to get all the benefits of EU membership and maintain access to other members’ markets, they do not like to share the profits that they make.

And not only that, but they accuse them of being corrupt and like to belittle them in their press with derogatory articles in magazines, like one published recently. The latest cover of Elsevier Weekblad, a Dutch economically liberal and socially conservative magazine, has stirred controversy across Europe.

With a cover that resembles a Nazi propaganda press release, it portrays once again dark-haired people relaxing and enjoying wine and a coffee, while blond individuals working hard. The image is accompanied by a title against the 500 billion deal, while stating “No more money to South Europe”. This is preposterous and outrageous; we have been in this position too many times. 

Ten years ago, we had the Germans portraying the Greeks, together with all the PIGS countries in same manner and as a response, Greek and Spanish media were portraying German officials as Nazis, which was the lowest point Europe has reached since WW 2.

That is not what the founding fathers of the EU have envisioned. What they wanted was to unite our continent, for states to share wealth and resources and enjoy similar standards in wealth, freedom, and social rights.

The Macron-Merkel proposal should have been welcomed and treated as a long-delayed landmark in European unification. It is something long overdue, since sharing the same currency requires inevitable and eventual deeper fiscal integration.

To start a war with Europe’s south once again has no justification. Greece and Portugal have done their homework, Italy is a G8 nation, a net contributor to the EU budget and a main world economy. Much more than the Netherlands. The Dutch cannot treat them the way the treated the Greeks and similarly, why should they any other member state.

Besides, why they bother only about Italy and not their frugal buddies the Danish, or any other from this group and their mishaps? I do not remember them complaining about the Danske Bank scandal as much, where Russian money were laundered and siphoned into Denmark and the UK primarily, through the bank's Baltic branches in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. 

There is not as much mistrust in that direction, only towards the southern states, even though Russian money have been flowing into Europe since the euro-zone crisis and not only the Danish did not lose their reputation, but Europeans cry foul whenever there is Russian meddling in Europe. Perhaps if we stopped harboring their dirty money, we could achieve more in dealing with their oligarchs. 

In the future, we will all need to compromise and realize that we are entering a world in which Europe cannot rely on anyone but itself, a much different reality. We need to collectively utilize our resources and help every country in Europe to reach the same living and economic standards.

 Going around in circles and blocking or postponing decisions that should have been implemented decades ago since the launching of the euro, is short-sighted and defeatist. And the Dutch together with the “Frugal” collaborators, are so disappointing right now.