THE EVOLUTION OF THE POLICY OF THE EUROPEAN UNION REGARDING THE RUSSIAN-UKRAINIAN WAR (2014–2022)

A. Martynov
{"title":"THE EVOLUTION OF THE POLICY OF THE EUROPEAN UNION REGARDING THE RUSSIAN-UKRAINIAN WAR (2014–2022)","authors":"A. Martynov","doi":"10.17721/2524-048x.2022.23.2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The problems of forming a common foreign policy of the European Union are caused by the difficulties of reconciling national interests and the dynamics of adapting the common policy to the chaos of international relations. In the early 1990s, the common foreign policy of the European Union suffered a fiasco in the Balkans during the disintegration of the former Yugoslavia. Russia expected that the example of the EU’s excessively sluggish reaction to the annexation of Crimea and the start of a «hybrid war» against Ukraine would provide an opportunity to annex the entire territory of Ukraine. The purpose of the article is to study the cause-and-effect relationships that influenced the actual formation of the European Union’s common policy aimed at protecting democracy in Ukraine against Russian aggression. The European Union was critical of the annexation of Crimea and the start of Russia’s «hybrid war» against Ukraine. But at that time, the conviction of the European elites prevailed that it was possible to appease the Russian Federation, even at the cost of concessions to Ukraine and at the expense of Ukrainian sovereignty and territorial integrity. The so-called “Minsk Agreements” worked for this. Even Russian interference in the 2016 US presidential election and the information campaign for the British referendum on leaving the EU in 2016 could not convince European elites of the opposite. The Russian Federation consistently crossed «red lines» until it made the mistake of deciding that the EU was «ripe» for a Russian attempt to change the government in Ukraine and deprive it of its sovereignty. The Kremlin was counting on its «fifth column» in the countries of the European Union. Only Hungary fulfilled these expectations. But in the matter of assistance for the defence of Ukraine, the European Union refused the principle of veto. This does not prevent Hungary from blocking the allocation of EU macro-financial assistance to Ukraine at the time of writing this article. The most radical supporters of Ukraine in the EU remain the Baltic countries, the countries of the «Visegrad bloc» with the exception of Hungary. Russian aggression helped Sweden and Finland to reconsider their traditional neutral policy and to get as close as possible to joining NATO. In October 2022, again without the participation of Hungary, the European Union launched a military training mission for the Armed Forces of Ukraine. Russian aggression against Ukraine, instead of splitting the European Union, contributed to the consolidation of the common foreign and security policies of the European Union. But this does not mean that the Russian Federation will stop putting pressure on the «weak links» in the European Union system.","PeriodicalId":394953,"journal":{"name":"European Historical Studies","volume":"139 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Historical Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17721/2524-048x.2022.23.2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The problems of forming a common foreign policy of the European Union are caused by the difficulties of reconciling national interests and the dynamics of adapting the common policy to the chaos of international relations. In the early 1990s, the common foreign policy of the European Union suffered a fiasco in the Balkans during the disintegration of the former Yugoslavia. Russia expected that the example of the EU’s excessively sluggish reaction to the annexation of Crimea and the start of a «hybrid war» against Ukraine would provide an opportunity to annex the entire territory of Ukraine. The purpose of the article is to study the cause-and-effect relationships that influenced the actual formation of the European Union’s common policy aimed at protecting democracy in Ukraine against Russian aggression. The European Union was critical of the annexation of Crimea and the start of Russia’s «hybrid war» against Ukraine. But at that time, the conviction of the European elites prevailed that it was possible to appease the Russian Federation, even at the cost of concessions to Ukraine and at the expense of Ukrainian sovereignty and territorial integrity. The so-called “Minsk Agreements” worked for this. Even Russian interference in the 2016 US presidential election and the information campaign for the British referendum on leaving the EU in 2016 could not convince European elites of the opposite. The Russian Federation consistently crossed «red lines» until it made the mistake of deciding that the EU was «ripe» for a Russian attempt to change the government in Ukraine and deprive it of its sovereignty. The Kremlin was counting on its «fifth column» in the countries of the European Union. Only Hungary fulfilled these expectations. But in the matter of assistance for the defence of Ukraine, the European Union refused the principle of veto. This does not prevent Hungary from blocking the allocation of EU macro-financial assistance to Ukraine at the time of writing this article. The most radical supporters of Ukraine in the EU remain the Baltic countries, the countries of the «Visegrad bloc» with the exception of Hungary. Russian aggression helped Sweden and Finland to reconsider their traditional neutral policy and to get as close as possible to joining NATO. In October 2022, again without the participation of Hungary, the European Union launched a military training mission for the Armed Forces of Ukraine. Russian aggression against Ukraine, instead of splitting the European Union, contributed to the consolidation of the common foreign and security policies of the European Union. But this does not mean that the Russian Federation will stop putting pressure on the «weak links» in the European Union system.
欧盟对俄乌战争政策的演变(2014-2022)
形成欧洲联盟共同外交政策的问题是由于调和国家利益的困难和使共同政策适应国际关系混乱的动态所造成的。1990年代初,在前南斯拉夫解体期间,欧洲联盟的共同外交政策在巴尔干地区遭受了惨败。俄罗斯认为,欧盟对吞并克里米亚的反应过于迟缓,以及对乌克兰发动“混合战争”,将为俄罗斯提供吞并乌克兰全境的机会。本文的目的是研究影响欧盟旨在保护乌克兰民主免受俄罗斯侵略的共同政策实际形成的因果关系。欧盟对俄罗斯吞并克里米亚和开始对乌克兰发动“混合战争”持批评态度。但当时,欧洲精英们的信念占了上风,认为有可能安抚俄罗斯联邦,即使要以向乌克兰让步、牺牲乌克兰主权和领土完整为代价。所谓的“明斯克协议”为此起了作用。即使是俄罗斯对2016年美国总统大选的干预,以及为2016年英国退欧公投造势的宣传活动,也未能说服欧洲精英持相反观点。俄罗斯联邦不断越过“红线”,直到它错误地认为欧盟已经“成熟”,可以让俄罗斯试图改变乌克兰政府并剥夺其主权。克里姆林宫寄希望于其在欧盟国家的“第五纵队”。只有匈牙利实现了这些期望。但在援助乌克兰的问题上,欧洲联盟拒绝行使否决权的原则。这并不妨碍匈牙利在撰写本文时阻止欧盟对乌克兰的宏观财政援助的分配。乌克兰在欧盟最激进的支持者仍然是波罗的海国家,即除匈牙利外的“维谢格拉德集团”国家。俄罗斯的侵略促使瑞典和芬兰重新考虑其传统的中立政策,并尽可能接近加入北约。2022年10月,同样没有匈牙利的参与,欧盟启动了对乌克兰武装部队的军事训练任务。俄罗斯对乌克兰的侵略非但没有分裂欧洲联盟,反而有助于巩固欧洲联盟的共同外交和安全政策。但这并不意味着俄罗斯联邦将停止对欧盟体系中的“薄弱环节”施加压力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信