Macron Secures Putin-Biden Meeting On Ukraine Despite EU’s Confusion

Macron Secures Putin-Biden Meeting On Ukraine Despite EU’s Confusion

EU confused as it condemns “clear violation” of Minsk agreement but praises Kiev’s “restraint”.

by Paul Antonopoulos, independent geopolitical analyst

The European Union’s disjointed foreign policy and unity has once again been exposed as the bloc’s High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Josep Borrell confusingly condemned the “clear violation” of the Minsk agreement but at the same time praised Ukraine for its “restraint.” This clear lack of objectivity and seriousness from the EU to the facts on the ground is forcing individual bloc members, such as France and Greece, to work towards peace in Donbass instead. In fact, it was French President Emmanuel Macron, and not Borrell, who secured a US-Russia summit to discuss Ukraine.

“The EU condemns the use of heavy weaponry and indiscriminate shelling of civilian areas, which constitute a clear violation of the Minsk agreements and international humanitarian law,” Borrel said. He then confusingly added that: “We commend Ukraine’s posture of restraint in the face of continued provocations and efforts at destabilization.”

Borrel did not specify what he meant by “provocations,” but it is an obvious reference to allegations of Russia-provoked hostilities and tensions in eastern Ukraine.

Although tensions on the contact line in eastern Ukraine intensified because of the Anglo Alliance’s (US-UK-Australia, or AUKUS) campaign to propagate about an imminent Russian invasion, the situation became worse when Kiev’s forces began shelling Donbass on the morning of February 17. The next day, Leonid Pasechnik and Denis Pushilin, leaders of the Lugansk and Donetsk People’s Republics respectively, announced the evacuation of civilians to Russia. An all-out military mobilization was announced on February 19.

In the same statement made by Borrell, he claimed that “the EU sees no grounds for allegations coming from the non-governmental controlled areas of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions of a possible Ukrainian attack.” This again is confusing as Borrell has already acknowledged that the Minsk agreement was dishonored in Donbass with a “clear violation” (without directly naming the obvious perpetrator – Kiev), but now says there is “no grounds” for a Ukrainian attack.

Perhaps Borrell meant there is no evidence of a Kiev-led ground operation to capture areas of Donbass that it no longer has control over. If this is what Borrell meant, then it again ignores that Ukrainian forces have recently mobilized troops and much heavier artillery shells and other equipment to the contact line.

This once again demonstrates why the EU as a collective bloc is not a serious institution when it comes to foreign policy matters and why individual European countries are bypassing Brussels to make initiatives to calm the situation in Donbass.

Greek Foreign Minister Nikos Dendias met with his Russian counterpart Sergey Lavrov on February 18 in Moscow, right in the midst of the Western anti-Russia propaganda campaign. This was also the fifth meeting between the two since mid-2019 in what seemingly appears to be a personal and warm relationship.

For his part, Lavrov stressed that “Greece is an important partner,” recognizing the Greek effort to maintain positive relations despite pressure from outside parties, namely Washington. In Moscow, Dendias emphasised that it is impossible to have a European security architecture that includes Russia and fully expressed his support for the Minsk agreement.

Although Greece is only a country of medium influence in the EU, it does highlight that there is no clear European consensus on Russia and the situation in Ukraine. This again demonstrates why Brussels is weak in foreign policy – individual states will mostly prioritise their interests over a collective bloc.

More importantly than Dendias’ visit to Moscow was the phone conversation between French President Emmanuel Macron and Russian President Vladimir Putin. Following the hour and 45-minute phone conversation on February 20, the Elysee Palace announced that the two leaders agreed “on the resumption of the work in the Normandy format,” including “on the basis of recent exchanges and Ukraine’s proposals.”

The meeting came as French Foreign Ministry spokesperson Anne-Claire Legendre said the day before: “We believe that the window for diplomacy is still open.”

Diplomacy’s “open window” was evident when it was announced in the early hours of February 21 that the White House had accepted a meeting between Putin and his American counterpart Joe Biden “in principle,” but only “if an invasion hasn’t happened”.

In this way, it is proven once again that the EU is incapable of strong and independent foreign policy as it carefully attempts to avoid upsetting Washington by not directly highlighting Kiev’s obvious violation of the Minsk agreement. However, by doing this, the EU is enabling Ukraine to continue its aggression against Donbass by praising its non-existent so-called “restraint.”

Because of Borrell’s continued failures, it has now become the responsibility of Macron to calm nerves down in Donbass.

With the likes of Borrell not representing European interests as he is mindful of American reactions, more EU member states will take their own initiatives to secure their interests with Moscow. As an example, we have already seen major European country France work to avoid war on the continent in the hope of building a Europe stretching from Lisbon to Vladivostok, whilst smaller countries like Greece aim to secure favorable gas deals and greater economic cooperation – Borrell has assisted in neither of these ambitions, preferring not to upset Washington instead of assisting fellow EU members.

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
6 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Dave

I now think this is more than a distraction, this is dead-dangerous and serious.
How can Ukraine go on instigating a war?
It is evident that both them, and NATO (i.e. the Anglo-American Axis) want war. Otherwise, U wouldn’t be shelling and the US not be lying so blatantly.
Question: What do we know about hypersonic weapons and how likely is their use?
Thanks.

Last edited 2 years ago by Dave
AlAtaque

Hypersonic weapons were build first by Russia as a response to the attempts of the US to create a defensive network against its nuclear capabilities. It is important to note that these missiles don´t work the same way other ballistic missiles do, they don´t go to the atmosphere they stay very close to the ground or even underwater, this is what makes them so advanced, they avoid detection and reach their objective faster.

The conditions for their use according to the Russian Federation are:

1.- In case of a nuclear attack to Russia.
2.- In case that the Russian State is in danger of extintion.

The US are the only country (I think) that has preemptive strikes allowed.

Yuri

jens diapers more stinky
nazi frizzy and rat driver sniff glue in arkansas

Christian J. Chuba

Putin, do not meet with Biden. It only adds credibility that he is talking you out of invading Ukraine. Are you invading Ukraine, if the answer is no then there is nothing to talk about, do not add to his dumpster fire.
If it is about shelling in Donbas, talk to Zelensky. Biden does not control the artillery on the Ukrainian side of the border.

Yuri

EU exists? it has as much like as exists in nazi frizzy arkansas trailer park when rapper driver distributes crack pipes to the other retired dishwashers