Another POV: Europe is Turning Into a "Black Hole" of World Politics

By Timofey Bordachev, Program Director of the Valdai Discussion Club

Published by VZGLYAD on 23 January 2025, Timofey Bordachev, Program Director of the Valdai Discussion Club, provides another in the series of papers about Europe and suggestions for Russia’s European policy we were told to expect by Karaganov. RT also edited and translated this effort, altered the title, “Weak and worthless: Western Europe’s elites have sent it into historic decline,” but at least kept some of the original title in its subtitle: “A region which once ruled the world has now become a geopolitical black hole.” IMO, there’s a distinct difference in meaning between the two headlines. Why RT feels obligated to alter author headlines is unknown but annoying. But since as far as I know, no RT editors read my substack, it makes little sense to argue with a non sequitur and concentrate on what Bordachev has to say:

We are far from thinking that the inauguration of a new American president means a revolution in the domestic and foreign policy of this power. It is very likely that most of the loudly stated goals will either turn out to be unattainable, or you will have to pass off failed results for victories. However, even what is stated as a program of action is enough to provoke an emotional reaction in Europe, a region that is in the most humiliating dependence on America and at the same time leads the most parasitic existence in modern international politics.

Our immediate neighbors to the West have been in this state of ambiguity for several decades.

The military-political backbone of Europe was broken during the Second World War. First, the crushing victory of Russian weapons, which destroyed the last hotbed of continental militarism. Secondly, the consistent policy of the Americans in relation to those European countries that they were able to bring under their control in 1945. This policy was to systematically deprive Europeans of even a minimal opportunity to determine their own place in world affairs. Britain–-the only European "big three" power not beaten by Russia—has retained some fighting spirit. But its material capabilities have long been so small that they allow it to act only "on the sidelines" of the Americans.

In the case of Italy and Germany, the situation was simple: they were defeated and placed under the direct external control of the United States. In other countries, the emphasis was unmistakably placed on the creation of controlled political and economic elites. Now this policy has simply reached its absolute limit: European statesmen are middle-level managers in the system of global influence of the United States. There are no others left in power there.

In exchange for such a miserable situation, Europeans, elites and society, received from the United States the most privileged access to the benefits of globalization. All that they needed, they gained without struggle and special competition. The combination of these two features has created a unique situation: if the parasitism of Americans is based on their strength, then in the case of Europe, the foundation of such a position in the world is precisely weakness.

European politicians like to talk about the need to overcome this weakness all the time. Our mutual favorite Emmanuel Macron was particularly successful in this. This is exactly what the US administration of Donald Trump seems to be pushing them to do.

Therefore, it is now difficult to understand the nature of concern on the part of European politicians about the intentions of the new owners in the United States. No, in words, everything looks logical, and we already heard this when Trump first became the owner of the White House in 2016. But in practice, there is still a lot of room for questions. And it is difficult to find what, strictly speaking, in these plans Europeans may not be satisfied in the current circumstances.

It is completely illogical to refer to the fact that the Republican government in America will require Europeans to significantly increase their defense spending. Over the past three years, we have constantly heard from the leaders of European countries themselves that they are vigorously preparing for war with Russia and are building up their own resources for this. The governments of Germany, France and the United Kingdom have repeatedly expressed their intention to increase spending on weapons and infrastructure necessary for the confrontation in the east on their own initiative. Given this, it is difficult to fathom the reasons for their dissatisfaction with Washington's demands to raise military spending to 5% of GDP.

Moreover, we know at the level of the most serious expertise that systemic Russophobia and the stirring up of military hysteria are now the main tools for the survival of European elites. This is confirmed by simple observations of European citizens who are sympathetic to Russia. In the event that European elites are really heading for war with us, they should only welcome Trump's demands for increased military spending. In any case, do not express concern about this. Or they are not sincere enough when they talk about their intentions in relations with Russia.

We also constantly hear that politicians and diplomats in Europe are concerned about the disdain of the new American authorities for international law and the organizations that embody it at various levels. However, in recent years, the whole world has had many cases to see that Europeans themselves were very careless about rules and regulations, if their interests required it. In 1999, it was the European Powers that provided the largest number of forces for the NATO aggression against sovereign Yugoslavia. The number, for example, of combat sorties on peaceful Serbian cities of French aviation then exceeded the American figures.

In 2011, the Europeans went into direct violation of the UN Security Council resolution on Libya, when they needed to complete the overthrow of the legitimate government of Muammar Gaddafi there. Now European politicians are lined up to welcome the forces that seized power in Syria. Not to mention the participation of EU countries in the West's illegal "sanctions" against Russia from the point of view of international law. In other words, European comments on the US withdrawal from international agreements look somewhat artificial. The same applies to issues of rights and freedoms, which are restricted on a much larger scale in Europe than in most countries of the world.

So, what can Europeans and their political elites really fear in their relations with the new US administration? First of all, of course, those who are in power: no one is particularly interested in the opinion of ordinary voters in the Old World.

It can be assumed that their fears are based on the fear of a complete withdrawal of the United States from Europe and leaving their wards to fend for themselves. This issue is also now actively present in political and expert discussions. However, even in this case, the reasons for the fright are unclear, since there is absolutely no one to threaten Europe without American patronage.

We are far from thinking that Russia may even theoretically be contemplating a military offensive against major Western European States. She has no reason to do so. And the fate of the Baltic provincials to such countries as Germany, France or Britain, in fact, is completely indifferent. And Nord Stream was clearly not blown up by the German Federal Chancellor. And in general: Europe knows the generosity and pragmatism of Russians better than anyone else.

The only suggestion that can be accepted as working right now is that Europe can only feel fear about two likely turns of American policy. First, the Trump administration's decisions to continue the military confrontation with Russia in Ukraine, but to remove all costs. There is no doubt that the political resources of the United States are sufficient to force the Europeans to take off their last pants, but arm the Kiev regime. Secondly, European politicians are simply afraid of any changes in their usual way of life.

The first problem can be solved somehow: through direct negotiations between Russia and the United States, which will lead to a lasting peace with guarantees that Ukrainian lands will not pose a threat to us. However, the second—the reluctance of Europeans to change anything at all—is much more serious. After centuries of glorious and turbulent history, Europe is turning into a" black hole " of world politics, which is absolutely impossible to do anything about, and remains in this state on the western borders of Russia. [My Emphasis]

Just how “Europe is turning into a “black hole” isn’t explained. First, what does a black hole do—its gravitational sink is so powerful no photons can escape, which is why the name. When and what constituted the previous light that Europe emitted prior to becoming a black hole, for the had to be light prior to the darkness. Is Bordachev painting with too wide a brush? Does no light emanate from Serbia, Hungary, Slovakia, Romania, Belarus, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Kazakhstan, all of whom are part of Europe as is Russia? I note Bordachev omits mention of the real political powers within Europe—NATO/EU—and how they control the behavior of their members in a totalitarian manner. Yes, some of the animals are allowed to squeak, but the rats stay in control—and who controls the rats? The Outlaw US Empire. At least Bordachev admits Europe is essentially a colony of the Empire. Perhaps that’s the genuine reason why EU/NATO has become a black hole: Everyone in power’s been bought or controlled via kompromat and thus kisses the boot and does the Empire’s bidding. Yes, Team Biden was replaced by Team Trump, but as noted the same degree of subservience is demanded, although the rhetoric has changed and become more realist. Yes, ordinary Europeans are responsible for the fate they now experience since they swallowed the lies and voted for the boot-lickers—it’s not like they’d never been lied to before. Perhaps Russia was too nice in its rhetoric toward the European masses. Perhaps that’s true in all its dealings with the Gloden Billion. Maybe Russian soft power was too soft.

IMO, the hysteria seen from European politicos is because they realize they are now seen for what they are—boot-lickers, frauds and outright traitors—and in danger of being voted out of office never to be allowed in again—the end of the gravy train. And in the case of the useless functionaries at NATO/EU, the collapse and disappearance of those institutions along with their pensions. NATO has always needed a threat to justify its existence. And the resource starved Western peninsula of Eurasia will need to interact with the nations to its East to keep their level of wellbeing, while others must so they can develop. Some European nations can feed themselves, but most cannot, and Europe’s natural geoeconomic dependency is on Eurasian nations, not the Outlaw US Empire across the ocean that only wants to plunder more of anything it can gain control over.

*
*
*
Like what you’ve been reading at Karlof1’s Substack? Then please consider subscribing and choosing to make a monthly/yearly pledge to enable my efforts in this challenging realm. Thank You!