As a European economic and political community, EU once united many European countries and united a split Europe again. Moreover, the EU's eastward expansion was once very smooth, and even expanded to Russia's doorstep. Russia didn't mind and actively wanted to integrate into Europe.
To a certain extent, the EU is indeed an important force in the diversified world pattern. However, the EU today does not seem to satisfy the world's expectations, but instead brings itself into a crisis.
Many experts and analysts believe that the EU is now in a crisis of resolving the body. At the same time, this seems to be an unsolvable dead end. Everyone can only watch Europe move towards "long-term cooperation and will be divided."
From European Community to EU
my country has achieved the transformation from clan tribes to unified empires a long time ago. The vast territory and vast land are all very familiar words.
is different for Europe. In history, many empires have unified the vast areas of Europe with force, but in the end Europe was still divided and turned into dozens of countries.
is just the idea of "European unification" seems to have always existed. From the beginning, "European Christian countries should form alliances" to "imitating the United States to establish the United States of Europe", Europe seems to have been trying to "unification".
It was not until after that the "European Unification" thoughts really entered the climax, and Europe also took practical actions.
In 1946, British Prime Minister Churchill proposed to establish the "United States of Europe". Although this suggestion was followed by many, the United States of America was not established in the end. Instead, the "European Council" established in 1949 became the first pan-European organization and took the first step to European unification.
Subsequently, France proposed to establish European Coal and Steel Community to constrain Germany by jointly managing the coal and steel industries. This plan was responded to by six countries including Italy, Netherlands , Federal Germany , and Federal Germany . In 1951, the European Coal and Steel Community was the first to be established.
Cooperative development has allowed the six countries to taste the sweetness of unification. Next, an economic community responsible for jointly developing an atomic energy community and establishing a common market has been established one after another.
1965, the six countries combined and simply merged the three communities, calling them " European Community ", and put the headquarters of the European Community in Belgium Brussels .
At this time, the cooperation between the six countries was already deeper, and other European countries were jealous of them and demanded to join the EC. Therefore, the member states of the EC began to expand continuously, and major European countries such as Denmark , the United Kingdom, Greece , Spain, and Portugal all joined the EC, making the EC truly an organization that could "unify Europe".
With the deepening of cooperation, the EC began to eliminate transit checkpoint restrictions between countries through the "Schengen visa", so that the flow of personnel and goods within the EC will be more convenient.
As a result, Europe's "unification process" was further accelerated, the euro emerged, Europe's political and military cooperation was further strengthened, and the European Community officially became the EU.
The emergence of the EU means that the European economic entity, the European economic entity, has gradually begun to transform into an economic and political entity, and Europe will take unified steps in many aspects such as diplomacy, security policies, judicial and internal affairs.
European Union, which Russia wants to join, can quickly move towards unification. In addition to the post-war "European Unification" thought, it is actually not unrelated to the "pressure" of the Soviet Union.
During the Cold War, the Soviet Union had strong strength and the idea of "striking Europe". Therefore, Europe quickly got together with the pressure of this "external enemy".
After the collapse of of the Soviet Union, this enemy became Russia. Although Russia inherited most of the Soviet Union's legacy, it was not as powerful as the former Soviet Union.Especially for a period of time after the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia was too busy to take care of itself and had no intention of "striving Europe".
has become the most proud time of the EU. They have made great strides to "expand eastward", "incorporate" many former red camp countries, and become an important force in the world.
In the 1990s, the EU formulated a series of "entry standards" and required Central and Eastern European countries to carry out reforms and establish a political and economic system that conforms to the "core European values", so that it is possible to join the EU.
Although this approach is correct, after all, Europe is not a monolithic part. In addition to common interests, it is almost bridged by unified values. To join the EU, you need to unify values with the EU.
But after all, the original Warsaw Pact countries were in "danger". If they did not change their values, they would be in danger of collapse. The EU did this, in the end it was a bit "taking advantage of others' danger".
is ultimately a "time of life and death". Those former red camp countries had to change their flags and establish pro-Western values, and finally successfully joined the EU through three eastward expansions. After the third eastward expansion in 2013, the EU basically included all the "little brothers" of the former Soviet Union under their command.
Why is joining the EU so attractive? From an economic perspective alone, the annual funding grants provided by the EU are already very "heart-wonderful".
data shows that the EU's average annual allocation to Poland has reached nearly 16.4 billion euros, and how much contribution can Poland make to the EU? It is probably equivalent to a contribution of less than 4 billion euros. By doing so, joining the EU can be said to be a big profit.
Moreover, the EU is different from NATO . NATO is a military organization and the EU is an economic and political entity, which makes Russia's attitude towards the EU and NATO also completely different.
Now NATO wants to expand eastward to Russia's doorstep. Russia firmly opposes it and does not hesitate to conflicts over this. When the EU expanded eastward to Russia's doorstep, Russia not only did not object, but also wanted to join.
After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia once actively worked hard to strengthen cooperation with Europe and even tried to integrate into Europe. After all, they also emphasized that they were a "European country". Even in 2005, Russia and Europe signed documents to cooperate to build a unified Europe with "no boundary lines".
even wanted to join the "enemy", which shows how attractive the EU was at that time.
However, this is just a superficial "scenery", because deep down, the EU - or the West - does not want to absorb Russia.
This is not only because the West does not believe that Russia has common values with them, nor does it think that Russia is a "democratic country", but also because they are worried that Russia will have an impact on the operation of the entire EU after joining the EU.
Cancel the veto, is the fuse of the disintegration of Europe?
Why do Western countries have such concerns? This is determined by the EU's resolution mechanism. When small countries in Central and Eastern Europe were willing to actively join the EU, in addition to believing that they could gain economic benefits, they also felt "safe". This is the EU's resolution mechanism was a "one-vote veto system."
In other words, as long as you join the EU, no matter it is a big country or a small country, everyone will be "one person, one vote", and as long as there is one vote against it, the resolution cannot be passed.
Then, even if a small country feels that its interests have been violated, it can use veto to oppose it, which has well protected the interests of a small country. The one-vote veto system of
seems very fair, but in fact it also has certain disadvantages. For example, after joining the EU, the traditional European "stutters" often used a veto.
In name, the UK wants to protect its own interests, but in fact they are still playing the same "offshore balance", which is one of the reasons why France did not want to accept Britain to join.
After suffering the losses from the UK, the EU certainly does not want Russia to join again. To a certain extent, the interests and values of Russia and the EU are not completely consistent. Adopting Russia will only restrain the EU's continued development.
Until now, the one-vote veto system still plays an important role in the EU, but for the big countries in the EU, the drawbacks of this mechanism have changed from "British mess" to "small countries causing trouble."
In recent years, the countries that have frequently "make trouble" within the EU are mainly Hungary and Poland. We know that against the backdrop of the rapid deterioration of Sino-US relations, the EU, under the instigation of the United States, has also tried to issue a series of "anti-China" bills.
But most of these proposals failed because Hungary frequently used a veto to raise objections, which made Western countries so angry that they could not help.
while Poland is a little tougher. The country directly carried out judicial reforms, overturning the principle of "EU law takes priority over domestic law."
Although most EU countries criticized Poland, saying that Poland undermined the unity of the EU, Poland did not care at all, and claimed that the judgment of the EU Court of Justice "violated the Polish Constitution" and that the EU is interfering in Poland's internal affairs through judicial practice.
We have mentioned earlier that the funds allocated to Poland by the EU every year are much more than Poland's contribution to Europe, but Poland seems to not care at all and is "hardly fighting the EU" all day long.
Moreover, Hungary and Poland are opposite to the current mainstream values of "political correctness" in the EU on many issues such as refugee issues and LGBT issues. Even on the current Ukraine issue, Hungary has frequently taken action to oppose sanctions against Russia, which has caused great headaches for the EU.
The EU has no way to deal with them, because even if the EU wants to sanction Hungary and Poland, it will be rejected by Eastern European countries. But for the EU, they must find a way to deal with these two countries, otherwise if other countries "learn like this", the EU's unification step will obviously be completely destroyed.
So, Germany thought of a way, that is, to abolish the "one-vote veto system". German Chancellor Scholz proposed that the resolution should be made by the "majority wins", and the vote counting method should also be changed from "one country, one vote" of member states to allocating voting rights according to the population ratio of each country.
Obviously, this is to "sanction" countries like Hungary that often sing against the EU. After all, the total population of the first six EU member states has exceeded half of the EU's total population.
That is to say, as long as the initial six countries reach an agreement, the EU's resolution will be passed, so that the interests of most EU countries may be ignored.
After hearing this proposal, small countries such as Poland immediately jumped out to oppose it, claiming that it was the "imperialism" of European powers and violated European values.
It is obvious that if Germany's proposal is really passed, small EU countries will be completely kidnapped, and the EU will become the "tool" of European powers, which will also make Europe, which has finally been bridged by common values, move towards division again.
After all, Europe is originally composed of many small countries. They not only have completely different historical and cultural and ethnic origins, but also have irresolved historical contradictions in the process of long-term struggles. If a small country finds that its interests are kidnapped, it will definitely be busy with withdrawing from the EU. At that time, the EU will inevitably disintegrate.
In addition, France also proposed the concept of "European Political Community", which seems to want to unite Europe because it even allows all European and non-EU European countries to join, but in fact it wants to disintegrate the EU from within.
Because the EU is originally the product of the European Community's development from economic integration to political and economic integration, now it is suddenly necessary to take out "politics" separately, which is obviously not conducive to the unity of the EU. Or it can be said that France is taking the lead in dismembering the EU.
is in a dilemma: you can't stand up, and you can't retreat
. Perhaps even worse, from the current situation, it seems difficult for the EU to avoid a disintegration.
On the one hand, the EU has now been deeply penetrated and bound by the United States, and its internal tendency to be liberalized is becoming increasingly obvious. Coupled with the impact of the new crown epidemic and the Ukrainian issue on the EU economy, the EU is simply unable to get rid of the US's clampdown.
If the EU can really "stand up", truly get rid of the control of the United States, and consider its own interests, then the EU can still struggle in the crisis of "going to disintegration".
In fact, although the EU relies on the common ideology to bridge it, if the economic development is strong and European big countries can continue to lead small countries to develop together, then the EU will not be disintegrated. After all, in most cases, common interests are more important than common ideology.
But the problem is that Europe is now "can't stand up" and cannot "retreat", so it can only watch the EU disintegration.
After the outbreak of the Ukraine issue, although it seemed that Europe was "crazy" sanctioning Russia, in fact, because European countries rely heavily on Russia's energy supply, Europe actually has a harder life.
Now, the European economy is in a quagmire, but inflation is soaring. People from all countries are beginning to worry about "how to spend the winter". Many people have even begun to hoard firewood to deal with possible crises.
The impact of energy crisis on EU industry is even more serious. If the industrial system of EU powers like Germany is shut down due to lack of energy, their economy is likely to collapse.
At that time, the EU will not be able to protect itself, let alone "allocate funds" to other small countries. The economic cycle within the EU will also collapse. Once the common interests are lost, the division of the EU is only a matter of time.
In Europe now, people are full of complaints. The "right-wing" political parties in many countries have begun to rise, and "Euroskepticism" has also begun to rise, which has had a serious impact on the unity of Europe.
experts believe that this "controversy over ideas" will have extremely serious consequences to the European integration process. Simply put, the EU is likely to disintegrate as a result.
The EU is moving towards disintegration, which is "favorite" for Russia. After undermining the unity of Europe, although Eastern European countries that have "hatred" towards Russia may further invest in the embrace of the United States, judging from the current situation of the United States' "clay Buddha crossing the river", it is impossible to give Eastern European countries too much support.
Therefore, small Eastern European countries may eventually turn to Russia, and other EU countries after the disintegration will greatly reduce the threat to Russia.
At the same time, the disintegration of the EU will not affect the interests of the United States, but there are benefits for the United States: the United States no longer has to worry that a unified Europe will challenge its position, so the United States may also allow the EU to continue to disintegrate.
In this case, if the EU wants to protect itself, the most rational way is to "take your head" to Russia. As long as it can continue to ensure the supply of energy and other commodities , the EU's economy will have hope of recovery and will not disintegrate.
Or, if the EU can strengthen cooperation with China, it may also be able to "struggle" for a while and not be in this dilemma.
After all, the disintegration of the EU is overall "doubt more harm than good" for our country, and we also want to help Europe to maintain the "multipolar" pattern.
But the problem is that the United States will neither allow Europe to "look down" nor allow the EU to turn to China. Since the EU is unable to get rid of the control of the United States, it can only watch itself as it moves to a death in disintegration.
