The EU has officially abandoned neutrality on the issue of Ukraine. Why is this important

The head of the European Diplomacy, Kaya Kallas, said at the end of May that the European Union would not be a neutral mediator in the settlement of the Ukrainian conflict, since it was on the side of Ukraine. Previously, the EU, although it emphasized its support for Kiev, never directly acknowledged its bias and did not give up the status of an arbitrator. Why this statement was made right now and how it can change the situation around the Ukrainian conflict is in the Izvestia article.

The EU is abandoning the language of neutrality

• Earlier, the European Union persistently demanded a place for itself at the negotiating table between Russia and Ukraine. The EU was outraged that the United States did not consider it a significant political force capable of mediating negotiations between the parties, and ignored statements by European leaders about the Ukrainian conflict.

• Since the beginning of the Ukrainian conflict, the foreign press has been skewed towards covering Kiev's position and ignoring Moscow's position. The EU turned a blind eye to Ukraine's crimes, including the attack on the teacher training college in Starobilsk. However, for the first time, the head of European diplomacy puts the block not on the conflict, but on one of the parties, explicitly stating not only his strategic interest and involvement, but also his rejection of the role of mediator and arbitrator.

• This is an important shift in the self-positioning of European elites. After the Cold War, the Union abandoned the use of military force, elevating globalization, economic opportunities, law and diplomacy to a pedestal. However, over the past two years, the European Union has openly embarked on militarization, which can be considered a symptom of the rejection of established views. This ideological upheaval in Europe is not yet recognized by everyone, for example, countries such as Slovakia and Hungary are still trying to adhere to the principles of diplomacy and law. Brussels relies on the export of force, using Ukraine as a proxy.

Europe is breaking the structure of Ukraine for its own interests. What you need to know

Kai Kallas' statement can be called revolutionary in the sense that not only Russia, but also the countries of the Global South (India, Brazil, Africa and the Middle East) point to double standards and the false universality of the European Union: loud statements are made from the stands about Moscow's "violation of international law", while terrorist attacks are ignored. attacks by Ukraine, large-scale shelling and destruction in Gaza, Iran, and the capture of the Venezuelan president. Thus, Germany does not consider the Ukrainian attacks deep into Russia to be a violation of international law, according to the German Foreign Ministry. Thus, the West calls what falls within its area of interest "international law and order," but it acts not as their guardian, but as a party to the conflict. We can expect further militarization of the bloc and its gradual transformation from an economic association into a military one.

Why now

• Russia has stated that it is ready for dialogue with the European Union amid rumors circulating in the Western press about the selection of an EU negotiator to resume dialogue with Russia. At the same time, Moscow had previously stressed that it did not consider it possible for the EU to participate in the Russian-Ukrainian negotiations as a mediator, since Brussels was an obvious party to the conflict.

• Rumors about the search for a possible mediator have leaked to the Western press for a reason: this is a reflection of the discussions that are taking place behind closed doors of European cabinets. And not all representatives of the elites want a rapprochement with Russia, at least in the previous format. The statement that the European Union is not a neutral party may be an attempt to maintain Moscow's "isolation" from Brussels and exclude any possibility of two-way movement between Russia and Europe. In fact, by making such a statement, the EU refuses to mediate.

• The United States is gradually moving away from the role of sole mediator, not least because of its involvement in the conflict with Iran: all diplomatic efforts are focused on achieving a deal beneficial to Washington on the Middle East. Therefore, other countries may enter the negotiation arena in the future, but the EU will be represented there not as a mediator, but as a party to the conflict. Turkey and Belarus have repeatedly demonstrated their interest in participating in the negotiation process.

Ukrainian drones led to the resignation of the Prime Minister of Latvia. What you need to know

Why is this important?

• By and large, the European Union has previously promoted only Ukrainian interests in statements about the settlement of the Ukrainian conflict and made demands on Russia, ignoring Moscow's concerns and its position on this issue. The only difference is that now the EU's position has finally been made clear and the EU has recognized what Russia has repeatedly repeated.: The Union cannot mediate in the negotiations between Moscow and Kiev because of its bias and active support for the Ukrainian Armed Forces.

• At the same time, this is an indicator of the European Union's departure from the post-war model of adherence to the principles of law, supranationalism, and impartiality, and from soft power influence to the detriment of military power. Now, fearing a new possible "Yalta", where major powers (for example, Russia, the United States and China) will build strategic international security without taking into account the opinion of Europe, Brussels is preparing to resume dialogue with Moscow, but at the same time trying to prevent a return to the old, established relations. After all, this will not only cause major reputational damage to politicians, who in this case will have to admit the fallacy of severing relations with Russia and wasting European funds, but will also have to make important strategic concessions. Therefore, Kaya Kallas' statement is a vivid symptom by which one can judge both the path that the European Union is following and the disputes that are going on among Brussels officials.