Connect with us

Europe

The Thrill of Amber – Germany’s Historical East – A Plea for Humanity

Published

on


Escape from Königsberg, Prussia, January 1945

My dearest father,

…. We were going to go out and, all of a sudden, planes came and – rum, rum – the bombs fell without any alarm. And from then on things became very unsettled and we heard the very loud artillery fire.

…. and wanted to go back to the Reich, because it was high time. Sunday afternoon we tried to get on a steamer, but we were always shot at…. That night we took an icebreaker to Pillau, for it was very quiet. In the morning we arrived in Pillau and immediately got on a large freighter, the Göttingen, and after 8 days arrived in Swinemünde and from there we went to Güstrow by train…

Now I want to close and let’s hope that the war will end soon.

(Güstrow, February 10, 1945, excerpt from a letter from my mother Eva-Maria to her father Paul Kuhrau.)

For my Mama

1944, some months before fleeing from Königsberg

The conquest of East Prussia

Immeasurable suffering and misery all over the world. That describes the years 1944/1945, which were certainly among the most terrible times in human history. And in one of the harshest winters in East Prussia, a horrible chapter of German history began: the conquest of East Prussia by the Red Army. Full of rage and the desire for revenge, whipped up by the ideologies of the Nazi dictatorship and by Stalinism, two great powers clashed, Germany and Russia. Soldiers on both sides of the blind ideological delusion brought immeasurable suffering and death to the people. One victim on the German side was the civilian population of East Prussia. Hitler and his advisors had little connection to eastern Germany.[1] The Wehrmacht was weak there; it was important to hold the western front. Germany’s east was left to its own fate. Evacuation was repeatedly rejected – “East Prussia will be held, evacuation is out of the question.[2] For reasons of propaganda, the fortress of Königsberg was not to be abandoned. In the end, the order to evacuate East Prussia came much too late.

And so, the East Prussian civilian population, the majority of them elderly, women and children, were knowingly sacrificed. Thus, they fell into the hands of the soldiers of the Red Army, who, blinded by the propaganda against all things Prussian, took cruel revenge, especially on women and children. “The Red Army has conquered in the course of Operation East Prussia, the home of German imperialism.”[3] Fear, rape and murder were the order of the day.

The Weeping Soldier and the Baby – On board the freighter Göttingen, January 1945 

My maternal relatives – my grandma with her three children – fled on an icebreaker from Königsberg on the evening of January 28, 1945 and arrived in Pillau the next morning. Carrying some 3,000 refugees and 2,500 slightly wounded people, the freighter Göttingen left Pillau the same day about 7 pm. My Mama, her mother and her sisters slept on the floor in the radio cabin. Suddenly the radio operator was shaking all over and called out that the Gustloff had been hit. That night, 28 survivors were rescued from the freezing water.  My Mama saw how two soldiers took a dead woman out of the Baltic Sea who was still holding her baby in her arms, which was crying terribly. When the soldiers were both on board, one took the baby from the dead mother’s grasp and also started crying bitterly. Mama said she would never forget that image: the crying soldier with the baby in his arms.   

Everyone disembarked in Swinemünde. And only a few days later the Göttingen was also torpedoed and sank on February 23, 1945, off Libau-Reede. Five hundred people died.[4]

Those who were lucky finally arrived in West Germany, traumatized by the terrible experiences of expulsion and fleeing over the backwaters (Curonian Lagoon), the Curonian Spit or the Baltic Sea. From now on, all displaced persons had to rebuild their lives far away from their beloved homeland. They accepted their fate without complaint. There was no time to process the traumas of war. Thus, human suffering and longing for the beloved homeland remained buried in their souls and under the rubble and ruins of Germany.

Uprooting and a lonely death

An estimated 14 million refugees had to leave their homes, losing everything, all their belongings. Approximately 2 million died while in transit. Germany lost a quarter of its territory.[5] Refugees and displaced persons who, unlike those in 2015, were not welcomed with applause and teddy bears.

On the contrary, they were not welcomed by the majority of West Germans, who feared having to share their possessions with these “barbarians from the East.” For many, the eastern territories were backward and the people who lived there were only uneducated “Gesocks.”[6] Few recognized that Prussia was in many respects much more advanced than West Germany. Since there was no such welcome as in 2015, the Allies had to organize the forced quartering of the new arrivals.

My maternal family was housed in Barmstedt, Schleswig-Holstein, in a room only 12 square meters in size. That is where my grandparents lived with their three children. All the furniture and carpets were removed in front of them, only a picture with a biblical saying still hung on the wall. My grandmother then asked the lady of the house to please take the picture down as well, because, after all, they were not able to sit on it. Which the woman then did, red-faced.

That’s how it was back then. That’s probably how the majority of Germans treated their own countrymen. West Germans were prejudiced against the newcomers, who were after all “subhuman” – the “refugee horde.” The attitude was widespread, especially in Schleswig-Holstein, because it had taken in the highest percentage of refugees in Germany, with displaced persons comprising about one-third of the state’s total population in 1950.[7]  This was another reason why my family had a particularly hard time of it in Barmstedt.

The refugees from Germany’s eastern territories were never integrated into society. Nor was such an integration wanted, since the newcomers were reminders of the atrocities perpetrated by the Nazi dictatorship and thus also of western Germans’ own guilt during that time.  Both sides refused to think or speak about what had happened. It was more of a silent assimilation. Even the numerous associations formed by refugees had a very hard time, were often politically instrumentalized by the political parties and, since the 1970s, branded as revanchist.[8]

In order not to attract further attention, most of the refugees worked quietly building their new lives and tried to forget the horror of their time on the run. Now a second displacement and disappearance began. For with the collective silence, the recollections of Germany’s East were also erased from memory.

This historical East, “the land of dark forests and crystal lakes,[9] was to be banished forever. Not only had the refugees lost their homeland and all their possessions, now all memory of towns like Königsberg, Tilsit, Insterburg, Cranz, Rauschen was also to be banished. They endured immeasurable suffering, which became unspoken pain and often ended with a lonely death in an anonymous nursing home many years later, especially during the pandemic in 2020. This is how Germany has thanked this war generation. It is shameful.

Fortunately, this generation of the war grandchildren is more at ease and consciously accepts the legacy of their parents, so that the times and the lives of this generation, who basically suffered the fate representative of all Germans, are kept alive in the “culture of remembrance”.

Even today, there is still a gap between those who lost their homeland and those who did not have to suffer this fate. I, too, as a war granddaughter, always feel different, apart and often alienated in many situations. A stranger in my own country.

What remains even today is an amputated, broken Germany; lost are the wealth, beauty and nature of a vast landscape, the rough wide Baltic Sea, a unique natural and cultural landscape with its elks, Trakehner[10] and precious, golden amber – Germany’s historical East.

They are losses that have never been quantified. In addition, everything Prussian has been erased from Germany’s “culture of remembrance.” What remains is a highly traumatized German population that, with the mantra of “collective guilt,” has had no chance to develop an identity with the fatherland and a healthy sense of patriotism.  Even then, the media worked closely with the victorious powers to keep the Germans attuned to this fraught collective guilt, using targeted propaganda, especially at schools and universities, to nourish it and to maintain the influence of the United States in Germany.

Keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down.” Spoken by NATO’s first secretary general, Lord Ismay, those words are still valid today.

Victims of war

Have we learned nothing from past wars? It seems as if humanity has not made any progress. As in the conquest of East Prussia, in all wars it is the civilian population, mostly the women, children and elderly, who suffer the most. War crimes are the result, as in the winter 1944/1945. As they happen now, during in the current war in Ukraine.

It has now been proven that the generation of war children passed on, unaware, the horror, suffering and misery of the war to their own children, to the generation of so-called war grandchildren, my generation. I am thus all the more shocked by the current situation in the world, and especially in Germany. Because given the majority’s clear support for arms deliveries to Ukraine, Germany seems to have learned nothing from the madness of the two world wars and the atrocities that happen when people are displaced from their homes and must flee for their lives.

War is war and is horrible no matter which country has been identified as the instigator by the public. People die, war crimes happen, and the main victims are and always will be the civilian population.

Vietnam, Syria, Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, the 9/11 attacks – to name just a few of the horrific events the world has experienced. In Ukraine, a proxy war between two nuclear powers, the US and Russia, is raging in the middle of Europe. Here, too, the civilian population is suffering. Here, too, people are fighting each other, fueled by the hatred and delusion of ideological propaganda.  But who is actually fighting each other? Is it not basically a fraternal people? Is it not the “Kievan Rus, the Old East Slavic Great Empire, Old Russia or Kievan Russia, the cradle of Russia, Ukraine and Belarus?”[11]

No one wants war

Fear and hatred towards people from other countries are most effective as propaganda tools to steer the masses in the desired direction. No one wants war – propaganda purposefully leads people into wars. And numerous industries benefit. People are diving deeper and deeper into division and fear. A deep-seated fear where all logic, reason, and sense of proportion, has been eliminated. When emotions take over, reason is turned off, and the propaganda has achieved its goal.

In the German population already traumatized by war, “the German angst” finds particularly fertile ground.

Thus, blindly controlled, humans are robbed of their humanity. People with other opinions on the virus, on the responses to it, on the Ukraine war, on the role of the US, on NATO are systematically denigrated and censored; and not only in dictatorships or authoritarian regimes.

Moreover, increasingly frightening images are coming out of China. The authoritarian country with its merciless zero-Covid strategy is timidly criticized by the West.  Democracy, freedom of opinion and a self-determined life seem to be a thing of the past. People are being turned into digitalized files. The social credit system is making its way from China to Europe.

“If you can’t do anything, go into politics”

In its current composition, Germany’s government seems to be the manifestation of this sentence. And in Germany, we probably now have a generation in government that is not comprised of war grandchildren – otherwise they would certainly be advocating loudly for the arms build-up. Who can seriously believe that arms supplies lead to ceasefire and peace? Division and fear have made any factual dialogue impossible. Our democracy has been replaced by a party state, almost like that in China. Government representatives, or actually representatives of the people, are only interested in securing their sphere of power. For quite some time, it has not been about “the people” or even about people and their needs. The human race is increasingly losing its humanity.

Servants of the US

The guiding principle of the Bundeswehr is WE SERVE GERMANY. But is it really so? If this motto is to be fulfilled, Germany would first have to define its own interests in order to be able to act in the interests of the German people.

The only problem is that, since the end of the Second World War, the mantra of collective guilt has been systematically perpetuated. There is a lack of healthy patriotism. Thus, it is hardly possible to define one’s own national interests and to enter with them into interactions with other states.

Looking at today’s Ukraine-Russia war, it cannot be in Germany’s interest to have a bad relationship with Russia. Quite the contrary: the Germans and Russians are connected by a great, albeit in part very painful history, as Vladimir Putin noted in his famous speech to the Bundestag in September 2001: “…. I would like to emphasize that history, like oceans, not only divides but also connects. It is important to interpret this history correctly.

There used to be a peaceful Putin, one who extended his hand to all of us; the German government at the time unfortunately rejected it. Where would we be today if we had taken a step towards Putin? Certainly not virtually on the brink of a third world war.

It is in Germany’s interest to maintain a good political and economic partnership with Russia in order to achieve a geopolitical balance, especially in Eurasia. Germany’s location – in the middle of Europe – obliges it to do just that. But this is not in the interests of the US and the UK. The US’s goal is to continue to secure world leadership and the dominance of the dollar. A strong German-Russian partnership would be a great danger politically and economically, especially since the US would then also lose its geopolitical influence in Eurasia. But also, the current war is forcing China and Russia closer together and could in the end endanger the US’s goal of securing world leadership as well.

A strong German-Russian alliance would shift the geopolitical balance to the east and give Germany a leading role on the world political stage. But that is precisely what is not wanted. To maintain control in Europe and in Germany, it is important to keep Germany firmly in the NATO alliance. NATO serves only US interests, not European or German interests.

Basically, we Germans should be grateful to Russia and especially to Gorbachev for the reunification of our country. In order to placate the other Western nations, Germany had to ensure that it would become a “European Germany” and that it would join and subordinate itself to the EU and NATO. After all, an empowered Germany must be prevented by any means. To ensure this is not forced on the country from the outside, an affinity for the EU had to be engendered among the German population.

The nation

The French geographer and geopolitician Jacques Ancel (1879–1943), among others, can be a good source of inspiration and reflection to get through this time of global madness more or less unscathed mentally. Ancel shaped a very human vision of French geopolitics. According to Ancel, man is the creator of the global world order and togetherness. The identity of the heart in which “human groups achieve a harmonious equilibrium and … finally recognize boundaries derived from a common memory, history, culture, and language.” Thus, “human groups [are what] achieve a harmonious balance, ultimately recognizing borders based on a common memory, history and language.” The result is “a nation of the heart in and of itself, non-rational.” Thus, the way is paved for the emergence of the much-needed nations of the heart.

In fact, history is a strength and not a weakness. According to Ancel’s vision, Germany, Poland and Russia might be at the crossroads of arbitrary borders and of borders of civilization. There are, on the one hand, the so-called arbitrary borders, which are more fraught, more strategic borders that have resulted from military pretensions. The borders of civilization, on the other hand, are more permanent as these borders are based on a common memory, common history and common language arising from a group of humans in equilibrium. The borders of civilization are “nevertheless more complicated because they are the object of numerous political and commercial interpretations” – even if the commercial justifications aim at “clearing a path” and not “enclosing” as the military justifications do.

According to Ancel, the boundary is “a political isobar that establishes for a certain time the equilibrium between two pressure areas: the equilibrium of mass and the equilibrium of forces.”[12] Thus, the real problem is not a question of borders. Because borders will always exist, especially in a globalized world. “There are no problems of borders. There are only problems of nation.” In the same spirit: “A solid nation, one in harmony, exists even without visible borders.”

Jacques Ancel consequently argues for man as creator.  “One does not revise borders, except by force; one changes the mind or the attitude.”  If you look at today, we are very far away from this change in attitude.

It can also be helpful to remember what Helmut Kohl said in the Bundestag on June 23, 1983 about the state of the nation: “…. there is only one German nation. Its existence is not at the disposal of governments and majority decisions. It has grown historically, a part of Christian, European culture, shaped by its location in the middle of the continent. The German nation thus existed before the nation-state, and it has outlived it; that is important for our future.”[13]

The thrill of amber, or nature answers in German

 “Culture has never known borders. Culture has always been our common good and has united peoples.” Vladimir Putin – September 25, 2001

To my great happiness, I have experienced for myself how true this quote is – when I was to travel for the first time to the homeland of my ancestors, to Germany’s historical East, to East Prussia, Könisgberg (today Kaliningrad), and West Prussia, Schneidemühl (today Pila).

From the very first moment, I was overwhelmed by a strong sense of connection to a region I only knew from stories told by my parents and grandparents.  And yet I was constantly surrounded by a sense of déjà vu – feeling I know it all, I’ve been here before. I heard Polish or Russian spoken and yet I had a feeling as if someone was “dubbing the film I was going through.”

An inner compass lovingly guided me through the streets of Königsberg and Schneidemühl; I stood in front of my dad’s parents’ house in Gartenstrasse, saw the garden where he played and walked along the little river, just like he did. I stood in front of the gate of the abandoned barracks in Kanonenweg in Königsberg. On the left of the bel étage, the first floor, was the apartment and I saw the kitchen window from which my Mama often climbed out as a child, holding on to the window and shouting “Help me down or I’ll jump.” A soldier was always immediately on hand to help my Mama down. I went down the Kanonenweg, then Cranzer Allee, as my Mama had described to me, to the Oberteich where she had always had an ice cream.

I watched the people, Poles and Russians, listened to the bells of the Könisgberg Cathedral, which we had always heard at Christmas played from a record, and as I recalled my grandparents’ teary eyes, I felt their longing for “the land of dark forests.”

For me, these are still poignant moments that I always remember with great pleasure. Everywhere in West Prussia, in the historic towns such as Osterode, Allenstein, Tannenberg, Elbing, Marienburg and Rastenburg, all the way to Masuria, in East Prussia, in the former Cranz, along the Curonian Spit, to Rossitten, I felt a strong source of strength, my source, which has been omnipresent within me and guided me through my life ever since. The people, Poles and Russians, were all extremely loving and I always felt welcome. As soon as they noticed that I am German and that my family is from here, they responded joyfully in German. Fortunately, all hatred was gone. Landscape, nature and culture are connecting and enveloping us all with love and protection.

In particular, I felt this on the Curonian Spit, on the brisk Baltic Sea shore with its waves. I shouted into the wind, “Grandma, Grandpa, I’ve come back!” And I heard their laughter. And when I walked through the “forest of dancing trees” on the Curonian Split and the strong winds were rustling through the boughs, I looked up at the sky and nature was whispering in German – identity of the heart.

I’ve come back – finally, back to the roots.

Listening to the Curonian Spit

Katja Banik

www.katjabanik.com

Specialist in geopolitical issues, doctorate from Sorbonne Nouvelle University;

speaker and guest lecturer on geopolitical, economic and political issues, focusing on Jacques Ancel’s geopolitical vision of “the identity of the heart.”

Author of articles published on moderndiplomacy.eu, russiancouncil.ru (RIAC) and worldscientific.com, and author of the book Les relations Chine-Europe à croisées des chemins, published by L’Harmattan, Paris. Katja is the descendant of ancestors who lived in East and West Prussia. Her family on her mother’s side had to flee from Königsberg in East Prussia in January 1945 and, on her father’s side, from Schneidemühl in West Prussia. She increasingly connects the themes of identities, roots and borders in her geopolitical views.

References and reading tips

Ancel, Jacques (1938):  Géographie des frontières, Gallimard.

Banik, Katja (2021): A clear view eastwards: Russia and Germany, www.katjabanik.com

Banik, Katja (2021): Without roots, no future. Decoupling ideologies, www.katjabanik.com

Banik, Katja (2019):  Europe and China in a globalized world. The geopolitical impacts of Belt and Road, worldscientific.com 

Banik, Katja (2016): Les relations Chine-Europe: à la croisée des chemins, L’Harmattan.

Banik, Katja, Jan Lüdert (2020): Assessing Securization: China’s Belt and Road Initiative, E-International Relations, e-ir.info

Bode, Sabine (2009): Kriegsenkel. Die Erben der vergessenen Generation, Klett-Cotta.

Brzezinski, Zbigniew (1971): Between two ages: America’s role in the technotronic era, Greenwood Press.

German Bundestag: Minutes of Vladimir Putin’s speech in the German Bundestag on 25.9.2001.

https://www.bundestag.de/parlament/geschichte/gastredner/putin/putin_wort-244966

General Lasch (1959): So fiel Königsberg, Gräfe und Unzer Verlag.

Großbongardt, Klußmann, Pötzl (eds., 2020): Die Deutschen im Osten Europas. Eroberer, Siedler, Vertriebene. Bassermann Verlag.

Kossert, Andreas (2009): Kalte Heimat: die Geschichte der deutschen Vertriebenen nach 1945, Pantheon Verlag.

Putin (2021): Being open, despite the past, Die Zeit.

https://www.zeit.de/politik/ausland/2021-06/ueberfall-auf-die-sowjetunion-1941-europa-russland-geschichte-wladimir-putin/komplettansicht

Ratzel, Friedrich (1941): Erdenmacht und Völkerschicksal, Alfred Kröner Verlag.

Teltschik, Horst (2019): Russisches Roulette: vom kalten Krieg zum kalten Frieden, CH Beck.

Schön, Heinz (2004): Die Tragödie der Flüchtlingsschiffe. Gesunken in der Ostsee 1944/45, Motorbuch Verlag.

Wagener, Martin (2021): Der Kulturkampf um das deutsche Volk. Der Verfassungsschutz und die nationale Identität der Deutschen. Lauverlag

Video: Sturm über Ostpreußen – Ostpreußen im Inferno 44-55 Teil 1.


[1] Sturm über Ostpreußen – Ostpreußen im Inferno 44-45, Teil 1

[2] General Lasch, p.32

[3] General Lasch, p.10

[4] Schön, p.110

[5] Kossert, p.9

[6] Riff-raff

[7] Kossert, p.59

[8] Kossert, p.190

[9] Hymn of East Prussia

[10] Famous horses from Trakehnen (East Prussia)

[11] Lexas Weltgeschichte: Kiewer Rus

[12] Jacques Ancel

[13] Martin Wagener, p.119

Author, speaker and guest lecturer on current geopolitical, economic and political issues related to China, EU and the US, focus on Jacques Ancel’s geopolitical vision “identity of heart”. Author at worldscientific.com, at moderndiplomacy.eu and book author at éditions L'Harmattan, Paris. As a member of the successor generation of the displaced population - her family had to flee on her mother's side from Königsberg in East Prussia in January 1945 and on her father's side from Schneidemühl in West Prussia - Katja increasingly connects the topics of identities and borders in her geopolitical views. Personal website: www.katjabanik.com

Continue Reading
Comments

Europe

The End of History, Delayed: The EU’s Role in Defining the Post-War Order

Published

on

While the world is following the dramatic unfolding of the Russian aggression against Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, Europe needs to start elaborating its vision for the post-war world. While a new Yalta might be needed, we all should realise that a peaceful world order has never existed outside the European Union. This in itself grants the EU the credibility – and responsibility – for arranging the post-war framework that secures the peaceful future of the continent.

By Dr.Maria Alesina and Francesco Cappelletti*

In the interconnected international society, war is not only a horrific and painful but also irrational choice. It is a zero-sum game, which sets into motion the domino effect of global repercussions. However, rational considerations have little to do with what stands behind the ongoing military attack on Ukraine. Russia’s war is not limited to Ukraine or aimed at a regime change to strengthen regional influence (as realists would say), nor does it represent an attempt to reinforce specific strategic interests (as a cognitivist analysis would suggest). It has emerged as something beyond traditional disputes: it is, as a matter of fact, an ideological war against the West. More than anything, it is Huntington’s “clash of civilizations”, although driven not by ideology or religion but by the two conflicting standpoints on human life – as a value and a non-value. This fundamental clash is happening now on the Ukrainian soil, and the battle is as fierce as it can possibly get.

The propaganda-driven “Rus-zism” rhetoric, missing any solid ideological basis or constructive meaning, consists of an overt anti-Western narrative aiming to establish a multi-polar world order and a vaguely defined concept of Russia’s “greatness”, entrenched in the shreds of evidence given by altered revision of events, such as the Great Patriotic War. A war that, in the eyes of the Russian establishment, has never ended. In the anti-Western rhetoric, the corroborating factor is a series of facts, events, convictions, beliefs, interests that support the leitmotif of the inevitability of “blocks”, an enemy, the “others”. A heritage of the Cold War. All this is grounded in the historical super Troika of the Russia’s foreign policy: fear of external threats, dispersed economic and political inefficiency, and focus on securing citizens’ support – by all means, ranging from propaganda to political repressions. This is a sheer exercise in power without purpose, control without vision, projected both internally and externally. This dynamic, although never fully dissipated, has been re-gaining momentum starting with Putin’s speech at the 2007 Munich Security Conference.

Today, in mid-2022, Russian aggression in Ukraine is only growing in atrocities and cynicism. In contrast, the EU politics still remain a palliative medicine, by definition unprepared to dealing with the concept of war. Political crises in several Member States – Italy, France, Estonia, Bulgaria – risk becoming a further destabilizing factor preventing the EU from fully standing up against Putin’s war plans. Meanwhile, the Europeans are becoming increasingly concerned with the upcoming ‘Russian winter’, recession, global food shortages, and a new migration crisis. As much as citizens advocated for support to Ukraine in the beginning, soon they might start demanding peace at any cost – most likely, Ukraine’s cost. This is the trap that Russia is orchestrating.

However, any simple, although desperately needed, ceasefire agreement risks only deepening the problem and postponing the solution. It will be a matter or years, if not months, when Russia restarts its aggression, possibly better prepared the next time around. The somewhat belated understanding of this simple truth should prevent us from re-engaging into the dilemma of prioritizing short-lived comfort and material gain over long-term solutions based on our fundamental, “civilizational” priorities. We need to remember that Europe’s prosperity has resulted from a prolonged period of peace – not vice versa. Those who threaten the peace, by definition threaten our growth and sustainability. Alongside building up its strategic autonomy for the 21st century, Europe must be prepared to do what it takes to secure a new long-term peaceful world order – not simply patch the old one.

Given that the ‘Russian factor’ will not disappear even after the overt military conflict is over, the Cold War II stands in the midst of diplomatic challenges anticipated for the post-war scenario. On the one hand, as Russia has acquired the official status of the world’s villain, dethroning China from this role, it will continue to face some extent of isolation. Regaining any level of trust will require years, and Moscow will struggle to find a credible audience to speak to when trying to redefine its external relations, while having to deal with a prolonged recession and a technological slowdown never experienced since 1991. On the other hand, without being naïve, we cannot expect any substantial regime changes to happen in Moscow. For centuries, the narrative ‘Russia vs. the West’ has constituted the very central axis of the national public discourse, even within the liberally-minded opposition circles. Such long-standing trends do not change quickly, if ever.

Although no notions of trustworthy diplomacy will bring Russia to the international negotiation tables for a long time, the need to guarantee security goes beyond this conflict and its territorial or ideological implications. The only viable solution is to find a way to contain Russia within a binding and comprehensive international framework. This means a pragmatic approach is needed in developing untouchable geopolitical, diplomatic, and security-related boundaries of the new order. The exact same boundaries that kept the first Cold War “cold”, with the difference that this time one of the great powers involved is – to use Kennedy’s word – declining.

The results of the potential Kyiv-Moscow talks will largely depend on the West’s willingness to avoid grey zones in the future security settlements. It is a matter of responsibility, especially for the EU, to provide a forum to assess, judge, clarify, evaluate, measure, and pragmatically set limits of the new post-war security system. While the US is interested, first and foremost, in slowly weakening Russia politically and economically, Europe’s long-term concern consists primarily in preventing its giant neighbour from disrupting the very basic principles of coexistence on the continent. A zero-trust model should be applied to Russia, while a new paradigm for debates should be developed from scratch: there is no more “balance of power” and “deterrence” to fit into the discourse. The world is now divided into nations that either care or not about commonly accepted principles, rights, and, above all, about the value of human life. The end of history, in 2022, is farther away than expected.

*Dr Maria Alesina and Francesco Cappelletti are Policy and Research Officers at the European Liberal Forum. Dr Alesina holds MA degrees in Political Science and EU Studies obtained in Ukraine, Germany and Belgium and a PhD degree in interdisciplinary cultural studies from Ghent University. She specializes in EU foreign, social, and cultural affairs. Francesco Cappelletti holds an MA in International Relations from the University of Florence and MA in World Politics from MGIMO. Member of Center for Cybersecurity in Florence. He focuses on cybersecurity, digitisation, Russian-Western relations and the relation between sustainability and technologies.

Continue Reading

Europe

“No longer analyze Asia with European eyes”, says French expert in Bucharest conference

Published

on

A 2-day academic hybrid conference organized in Bucharest at mid-July by MEPEI (Middle East Economic and Political Institute) and EuroDefense Romania, two Bucharest-based think-tanks, was the perfect venue to learn about the latest analyses on economic, geopolitical and security topics related to the Middle East and Asia, during which China was mentioned by all speakers as clearly playing a role in today’s international order. Entitled “Middle East in Quest for Security, Stability, and Economic Identity”, the conference was the 8th in a series of international conferences that annually gather well-known experts from all over the world to present their analyses and research on highly debated topics such as terrorism, Middle East, emerging Asian countries, the rising China, to which this year a new topic was added: the conflict in Ukraine.

Interesting ideas derived from the speakers’ presentations.

Adrian Severin, former Romanian minister of foreign affairs and EU parliamentarian, pointed out that “the conflict in Ukraine is actually one between Russia and the West, but economic sanctions never stop wars, and they even may lead to global disaster”. Severin considers it to be more and more difficult for NATO to defend its allies, with so many countries relying on NATO, and on the US, for their national protection, including non-European countries such as Saudi Arabia and Israel. When it comes to Asia, Severin sees “China to have a first rank role in shaping the world order.”

Teodor Meleșcanu, another former Romanian minister of foreign affairs, stressed that “Asia has the majority of the world’s population and lots and resources, and the future of Asia will assume the future of our civilizations.” Meleșcanu explained that “China wants to stabilize the world and to forge alliances, but not to fight with the West. Chinese trade is not interested in confrontation with Western partners by making alliance with Russia and it’s obvious why – because the West means more than 700 million people whereas Russia means only 114 million.” Meleșcanu suggested that the optimal solution in international relations is to operate with regional organizations in order to have dialogue, not directly with “the big boys in the garden.” Meleșcanu also encourages never-ending dialogue between the US-Russia-China, as the current situation proves it, in order to prevent such events that destabilize the world. He believes that the principles in Norman Angell’s The Great Illusion will always apply, as war does not actually mean conquering territories.  

Lily Ong, host of the Geopolitics360 live show in Singapore, confirmed that regional organizations are vital for dialogue: “Had not it have been for ASEAN, Singapore would have been on the menu, not at the table.”

Foad Izadi from the University of Tehran informed that Iran signed a 25-year agreement with China, and a separate one with Russia, and said “Iran would welcome such 25-year agreements with European countries. It’s Europe’s decision if they really want to follow the US decisions, but the US interests are often not aligned with the European interests”, concluded Izadi.

Vasily Kuznetsov from the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences in Moscow reminded the audience that Russia and the West cooperated very well in Libya, in fighting against ISIS in Syria, and expressed his confusion about Europe’ militarized approach towards Russia.  He stressed that “the current international situation will result into the strengthening of Asian centres of global power and global economics. China, as well as India and the Middle East as a collective actor become new great powers directly linked to each other, without the West.” At the same time, Kuznetsov sees “for China, a dilemma between pragmatic economic interest and global political ambitions, and for India, a choice between regional and global ambitions outside South Asia”, and he wondered whether “China can have a realistic foreign policy in the Middle East which  is facing issues of internal reconfiguration, sovereignty and security.” For the US, Kuznetsov sees the biggest challenge in the effort “to preserve leadership without more engagement, to make American politics more successful and to combine values and pragmatism.”

 “The rise of China is beneficial not only for China but for entire Asia”, believes Yao Jinxiang from China Institute of International Studies (CIIS) in Beijing. “The rise of Asia will rebalance the world.” Yao also stressed that “people are often biased about Asia. Let us not forget that, apart from the wars led by the US in Asia, Asia has been stable with no war for a long time. The self-control of the Asia countries ensures stability. It looks that it’s easier to attract Europe in a war than Asia. Asian countries try to solve problems by consensus. For example, China, Japan and South Korea step back because ASEAN is the leader. On the other hand, China has always been defensive. China does not want to claim hegemony or to replace the US, or another great power.” Yao equally explained the two terms used to refer to the same region: Asia-Pacific and Indo-Pacific: “Asia-Pacific reflects economic relations, whereas Indo-Pacific rather mirrors the political and military relations”, and he stressed that “China does not want to claim hegemony in this world or to replace the US or another great power. China is only interested in prosperity around the world and it watches carefully the Global Development Index and the Global Security Index”.

Pierre Fournié, French expert on Asia from SUFFREN International think-tank declared the Belt and Road Initiative, formerly One-Belt, One-Road (OBOR), to be “a magnificent project that could be pivotal in Europe” because “trade has always been a peaceful and fruitful relation among countries.” Fournié made clear that the war in Ukraine, inflation, migration, social discontent in Europe and the ongoing reconfiguration of the US society create conditions for Asian nations to become key partners in the post-war reshaping of Europe. “Thus, BRI, or the Indonesian Global Maritime Fulcrum are magnificent assets. Fournié also suggested that ”the current economic model creates tensions, and it’s time for  people to apply mutual aid and to unite to create coo-petition, a term coined by himself, and not competition. He recommended people to “no longer analyze Asia with European eyes.”

Continue Reading

Europe

Why the EU Could End Within a Year

Published

on

Germany, which has been high-and-mighty within the European Union and has imposed austerity against weaker European economies such as in Greece, Spain, Italy, and Portugal, is now demanding that other EU member nations bail Germans out of what will soon inevitably be an energy-emergency that results from Germany’s having complied with America’s demand to not only join with America’s sanctions against Russia, but to even terminate Germany’s Nord Stream 2 Russian gas pipeline that was supposed to be increasing — instead of (as now will be the case) decreasing — Russia’s natural-gas supplies to Europe. Germany was, until recently, the industrial motor of the EU, and therefore has the most to lose from reduced and far costlier energy-supplies; but this has now happened, and will escalate in the coming winter. As those energy supplies get reduced, energy prices will rise, then soar, and Germany’s economy will get crushed. Germany’s leaders (like in the other EU nations) complied with the American anti-Russia sanctions demands (which are based on faked ‘information’); and, as a result, the German public will soon be freezing, even while Germany will be spending astronomically higher prices for energy than it had previously been paying. The plunging energy supplies from Russia will be replaced by increased supplies from other countries (including America) whose energy is far costlier than Russia’s; and only a small fraction of those reduced supplies from Russia will be able to be replaced at all. Something will have to give, probably the EU itself, because the resultant rapidly escalating internal hostilities between EU nations — especially between Germany and the nations that it now expects to bail it out of this crisis — could blow the EU itself irrevocably apart.

This will be happening at the same time when the EU — which was extremely committed to reducing or even eliminating both nuclear and fossil fuels and especially coal — is suddenly rushing to increase greatly its use of those non-green fuel-sources, and when European voters who had placed those people into power will not like seeing their leaders turn 180 degrees now into the opposite direction, toward global warming. Previously unanticipated new questions will inevitably become raised. Furthermore, the transitions back to fossil fuels can’t even possibly be done as fast as Europe’s leaders are promising; and, as a consequence, not only will Europeans be chilling-out and shivering during this coming winter, but their leaders will have a lot of explaining to do that can’t be explained except by admitting that they had been wrong — terribly wrong and unprepared — and this undeniable fact will cause political chaos, as the mutual recriminations about their multiple failures will embitter Europeans about the entire EU project, the project of creating one single incomprehensibly bureaucratic U.S.-satellite European mega-nation, the “European Union,” that is composed of virtually all European nations. Nostalgia about the past, of beautiful independent European nations, and bitterness about the future, of “north versus south” (etc.) in Europe, will take over, weakening the EU’s fabric, and bringing into question the entire post-WW-II cross-Atlantic alliance (subservience, actually to the Russia-hating U.S. Government), both America’s NATO and its political twin, the U.S.-dominated EU and its thousands of American servants in Brussels.

The most-recent comprehensive evaluation of the energy-needs of the EU nations is the September 2008 “Europe’s Dependence on Russian Natural Gas: Perspectives and Recommendations for a Long-term Strategy” by Richard J. Anderson of the George C. Marshall European Center for Security Studies, funded by the U.S. and German Governments. It made clear that the lowest cost and fastest-growing fuel in Europe (unless EU countries would institute polices to change this, which didn’t occur) was pipelined natural gas from Russia, and that this was especially so regarding electricity-production, industrial uses, and chemical feedstocks for plastics etc. That’s what has happened — Russian dominance of Europe’s energy-supplies (and industrial supplies) — and, as-of 2008, the countries that were the most dependent upon cheap Russian pipelined natural gas were (see this image there): Germany, Poland, Slovenia, Hungary, Turkey, Austria, Czechia, Greece, Finland, Slovakia, Bulgaria, Belarus, Moldova, Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia. 

Presumably, those are the nations that will be especially “chilling out” this coming winter, in order to continue America’s political domination over Europe. The supposed moral imperative that has supposedly triggered this “chilling-out” is Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 as being Russia’s inevitable ultimate response to America’s coup grabbing of Ukraine in February 2014 and NATO’s insulting-to-Russia insistence that this U.S.-made new Russia-hating Ukrainian regime has a sovereign right to place American missiles on Russia’s border only a mere five-minute striking-distance to nuking Moscow — that’s the EU’s supposed moral-imperative reason to turn Russia (Europe’s cheapest energy-supplier) off as being a supplier of energy to Europe. But, as a result of turning off Russia’s energy-spigots in Europe, the EU itself might become destroyed, and a mere has-been economically, culturally, industrially, and otherwise, just so that Europe will remain as being vassal-nations to America (its “dispensable” nations, like all the rest are), instead of to become what it always should have been, and naturally would have been — the radiant glory of the world’s largest continent: Eurasia, a Europe that includes Russia, instead of that endangers Russia. The glory of Europe is done for, finished as what it was, and the only real question now is how fast? Oh — and WHY? Why did Europe’s leaders do this? That will be the real EU-killer question.

The Europe that was, is gone — killed by the regime in Washington DC, using its many hired agents in Europe, and their hired guns in NATO.

Continue Reading

Publications

Latest

Trending