The EU, Democratic Peace Theory, and the Ukrainian Crisis

Written on 8 May 2014

congress-of-vienna

In my previous article I hinted at the role of European Union foreign policy in the creation of the crisis in Ukraine.  I will now focus on how the EU’s aggressive foreign policy is mirrored by its erosion of democratic structures and its crackdown on dissent in its domestic policy making.

Under Democratic Peace Theory it is postulated that democracies do not wage war on each other.  The EU, as indicated by its institutional structures and its lack of tolerance for political dissent, cannot be regarded as a democracy.  Merely having something referred to as a “parliament” is not sufficient for a political entity to be a democracy.

In some ways the European Parliament is similar to the State Duma of Imperial Russia under Tsar Nicolas II which existed but had no real power.  Imperial Russia was never a democracy just as the European Union has never been a democracy.  The fact that many of the powers of EU states have been transferred to the non-democratic European Commission mean that those individual member states also can no longer be regarded as genuine democracies. According to Democratic Peace Theory this bodes ill for international peace.

I just read an article at Breitbart.com entitled “The European Commission is pumping propaganda money into Britain, trying to interfere in the elections to the European Parliament” that shows how democracy within the European Union has been and continues to be subverted.  This development arises from the fundamentally anti-democratic structure of the EU itself.  If this article is correct then state resources are being actively employed to subvert the democratic process in order to control the outcome of an election.

The dirty tricks or “active measures” against political opponents of the EU regime are not restricted to UKIP.  On 26 April 2014 another candidate for the European elections, Liberty GB leader Paul Weston, was arrested because he quoted Winston Churchill in a speech.  Prior to this the Liberty GB radio host Tim Burton was taken to court in what appears to be an act of vexatious litigation.  After the expense and inconvenience of going to court he was acquitted.  The pattern is clear, it is only opponents of the EU who are arrested and exposed to what amounts to judicial intimidation.

These episodes of political repression illustrate clearly the direction in which the EU is going.  The claimed motive for such repression may be regarded as necessary by many, but never-the-less the impact on democracy is dire.  The way a state treats its own citizens is a window through which to see how it is likely to behave with its neighbours.  Repressive regimes are more likely to have aggressive foreign policies because a population’s natural inclination for peace is more likely to be supressed by those who hold power.

This perhaps explains recent EU policy with regard to Ukraine.  The people of Europe have no interest in the situation in Ukraine, but EU leaders do.  The people of Europe have not real power to stop them from the dangerous course that they have chosen to take.  The anti-democratic basis of the EU makes a major new war in Europe more likely!  Far from blaming Vladimir Putin for the crisis, blame – if any is to be applied, could more likely be laid at the door of the commissars, apparatchiks, and enforcers of the EU.

 

The Ukrainian Crisis and the Role of the European Union: The Great Game in the 21st Century

Written on 7 May 2014.

rhodes-colossus

Above: Cape to Cairo – expansionism in the past. Does the modern EU want to bestride Eurasia like a colossus, from the Atlantic to the Pacific?

The Ukrainian Crisis illustrates the re-emergence of Great Power rivalry in the new multi-polar world order. To blame Russia for this situation is simplistic in the extreme.

It could be argued that the European Union encouraged the violent uprising against President Viktor Yanukovich. This did, after all, follow his abandonment of a trade agreement with the EU. The EU supported the protesters of President Yanukovich because it was in its strategic interests to do so. It opposes those who protest against the new regime in Kiev for exactly the same reasons.

It could also be argued that the EU is now an aggressive expansionist power. Indeed as the Russian sphere was shrinking the EU was expanding into that sphere. Furthermore, the Barcelona Declaration adopted at the Euro-Mediterranean Conference in November 1995 could indicate an intention to expand the EU into North Africa and the Levant. This may explain the so called Arab Spring and the ongoing crisis in Syria!

Perhaps Russia is wondering what territory on its borders will be next! Maybe it worries that at some time in the future the EU may repeat the process by sowing division within the Russian Federation itself. The “Manifest Destiny” of the EU currently seems to recognize no bounds.

While the EU does not have a problem with the referendum later this year that gives people in Scotland the opportunity to vote for the partition of the UK, it does not seem to be willing to extend this logic to Ukraine. Partition in the Ukrainian situation makes sense for the sake of international stability, while with Scotland independence is a political whim. Indeed, the call for Scottish independence appears to be personal hobby horse of certain Scottish politicians. Of course having the states within its borders carved up makes the central EU authority stronger and its ‘member states’ less influential! What does this tell us about the ambitions of the EU and its rulers.

The Western media seems eager to back up the propaganda of the EU. We see within EU countries how certain stories both international and domestic are suppressed by those who control the media. We also see an EU elite, using the un-democratic EU executive – the European Commission, to trample on democratic freedoms within the EU, and demonize opponents of the regime. We see this currently in the UK with the negative coverage of the efforts of the resurgent UKIP. The EU as an institution therefore cannot argue that it somehow has more democratic legitimacy than Russia. Indeed unlike in the EU the executive in Russia is elected by the people.

The situation in Ukraine is merely the result of great powers pursuing, promoting, and defending their own self interests. No side can be blamed for that. It is unfortunate that the people of Ukraine are now pawns in a new Great Game.