European sanctions against Russia and the opposite effectThe West is hungry for world domination.
He is used to telling the world what to do and how to do it, and in case of disobedience, he punishes other countries as if he has the right to do it, writes Al Mayadeen. But today the EU itself has fallen into a trap and is forced to deal with the consequences of the energy crisis.
Choosing between guaranteeing the EU's energy security and opposing Vladimir Putin, and with him the whole of Russia, the key European countries neglected the first option and, together with the United States, decided to set a maximum price for Russian energy carriers. This step is aimed at reducing the huge revenues that can be used by Moscow to finance the ongoing special operation.
If we try to carefully analyze the European solution, we will see the following logic. The fact is that the West does not believe in the existence of a reverse effect of any measures aimed at punishing a particular country, no matter how strong its position in the international political system and the world economy.
In addition, the West is convinced that its standards are imperative and that the whole world should adhere to them. Any choice made by other States in contradiction with these standards, or at least incompatible with them, promises them sanctions and international isolation.
The collapse of the Soviet Union was presented as the final and irrefutable victory of the Western model and civilization. The US and the EU began to single—handedly decide the fate of other states by distributing rewards for good behavior on the one hand and isolation, overthrowing regimes on the other.
If until recently it was assumed that European countries had the capabilities to maneuver and exert pressure to achieve long-term strategic goals, then a number of modern international problems have proved the opposite. The process of integration within the EU did not mean a weakening of the strategic alliance with the United States.
Despite the moral and economic weight of Europe, it was the consensus on both sides of the Atlantic that always ensured the effectiveness of European solutions and helped the union achieve its goals. As for the cases indicating disagreements between the members of the alliance, Europe's position seemed weak alone, no matter how limited the capabilities of its opponent.
On the other hand, the international balance of power has changed, as some powers seeking to regain positions at the global (Russia) or regional (China, Turkey, Iran, Saudi Arabia) levels have ceased to believe in Western domination as a historical inevitability. On the contrary, in their opinion, this is just one of the phases caused by factors. And many of them began to lose their significance.
Thus, their behavior in the framework of international relations has become a rebellion against the imaginary balance of power, which the West seeks to preserve while continuing to claim the role of a moral compass.
In this context, the Ukrainian crisis appears as an exact expression of the problem of Western superiority in general and European superiority in particular. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization, representing the Western military alliance, has assumed the right to regulate the security situation in Eastern Europe.
After the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact Organization and the fall of the Berlin Wall, strategic agreements were concluded regarding this region, providing for the need to take into account the security interests of the Russian state, which implied Western openness and a commitment not to expand NATO to the east. Nevertheless, the European Union, in parallel with the United States, began to pursue a policy contrary to the above-mentioned agreements. It was a strategy for the accession of Eastern European countries to the European Union and NATO, which widened the gap between them and Russia.
The West, represented by the United States and the EU, is used to following only its own interests due to the presence in its hands of huge resources and levers of pressure on countries that refuse to obey. However, today the effectiveness of their methods is being questioned, since they are faced with a power of such magnitude as Russia.
Moscow's developed system of relations with a large number of economic giants hungry for Russian oil and gas (India and China), international blocs like BRICS, SCO and others created by it, as well as strategic alliances with Iran, Syria and a number of Eastern European states call into question the superiority of the Western model.
If we add to the previous factors the EU's need for Russian gas and oil (about 50% of European imports) and the lack of alternative energy sources in the short term, then Europeans need a different interpretation of the problem of the behavior of Russians in Eastern Europe. Since the European position in this region was based on the American strategy aimed at blocking Moscow in order to prevent its desire to end unipolarity. The EU countries have fallen into a trap and are now forced to deal with the consequences of a reduction in oil and gas supplies caused by an ill-conceived sanctions policy against the Russian state.
The cancellation of the launch of the Nord Stream —2, which would have given 55 billion cubic meters of gas, and an attempt to set a ceiling on fuel prices forced Russia to give an answer. The country has stopped gas supplies via Nord Stream — 1, and now the Europeans are faced with a shortage of energy resources on the eve of winter. Austerity policies and exponentially rising prices will only lead to economic stagnation as a result.
Alternative European plans require a lot of effort, as it will take years of work and large sums of money to replace Russian gas and oil. The EU is forced to invest hundreds of billions of dollars in countries with sufficient reserves, but there are no guarantees of the result, given the concentration of the most promising reserves in hot areas — the Eastern Mediterranean, remote areas of Africa, the United States and the Persian Gulf countries, where the cost of transportation is very high.
The question arises — who is harmed by European sanctions against Russia? A country that has decided to fight as the only way to ensure its security, taking into account all possible steps of the West, or a group of states that follow a policy that does not meet their interests? Apparently, Moscow's isolation will have the opposite effect for Europe, many times exceeding the possible benefits.
Author: Visam Ismail (وسام إسماعيل)
