On January 21, 2023, French president Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Olaf Scholz published a joint article entitled "Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung" (German version) and "Le diary du Dimanche" (French version) entitled "Seven strategical goals to strengthen Europe". As in Poland, an crucial text went unnoticed. Hence the thought to discuss it. The most interesting flavors we have allowed ourselves to get free of.
In the beginning, we read that both authors compose on the occasion of the 60th anniversary of the signing of the Treaty of Elisha in 1963, the recognized beginning of the reconciliation of both nations, and as the beginning of the construction of a Europe based on the alliance of France and Germany. Macron and Scholz state that the treaty brought to Europe a peace that prevailed until "2022 erstwhile Russia brought the war back to EuropeIt’s okay. ” Then we have generals about the war going on to get concrete. The authors say that her detonation is “a turning point that led to a strategical recovery that includes the nonsubjective European sovereigntyIt’s okay. ”
To accomplish this "European sovereignty" Macron and Scholz propose "seven strategical objectives“for joint implementation by all EU associate States:
1/ Investments in the European defence industry. The authors write: “The first major challenge for us is to guarantee that Europe becomes even more sovereign and has geopolitical capacity to form global order. In order for the strong Europe of next day to be strong, we must already invest more in our armed forces and in the foundations of our defence manufacture in Europe.It’s okay. ” Although its arms programme is justified by membership in NATO and the anticipation of better military cooperation with the US, it is clear that it is about independency from buying American weapons.
2/ Centralising the EU economy. We read that “geopolitical power depends not only on military resources, but besides on resilience and our ability to decision forward in strategical areas. We will improve the diversification of strategical supply, strengthen our capabilities in critical areas and become the world's first climate neutral continent. (...) We will (...) participate in joint gas purchases at European levelIt’s okay. ” These concepts mention to the old French thought of the alleged European economical government, namely to make central planning and intervention of EU bodies.
3/ Innovation. At this point, the authors guarantee that the innovation of associate States' economies will increase as a consequence of increased interventionism by central EU bodies.
5/ Centralist Green Revolution. This point states: “strengthening our unique European model must make economical and social advancement go hand in hand with environmental transformation. This means, above all, that we proceed to play a leading function in the fight against climate change and biodiversity loss.It’s okay. ” Since the alleged green revolution is intended to show the "uniqueness of the European model", it should be read that climateism is to be raised to the rank of the EU's public ideology, distinguishing it from another large economical spaces in America and Asia. The next point on climateism is even more interesting: “We want to further make Common European social and taxation standards, paving the way for greater social convergence and equalityIt’s okay. ” It follows that the ideology of climateism is to be merged with the centralism of the EU institutions, which, under the pretext of its implementation, will harmonise taxes in the associate States.
6/ Financial centralisation. The authors write: “We call for more ambitious steps to be taken towards the Capital Markets Union and the completion of the banking union. associate States will proceed to guarantee the sustainability of public finances, including by improving the quality of public finances and focusing on investments and reforms essential for environmental and digital transformation and key elements European sovereignty. This should be supported by efficient EU budgetwhich invests in European public goods and has real own resourcesIt’s okay. ” This means that the EU's centralisation processes are to culminate in the creation of its own budget and the introduction of European taxes.
7/ Fighting Dissidents. This point states that the EU has values specified as: "individual freedom, regulation of law and democratic participationIt’s okay. ” Therefore, ‘we must proceed our efforts to support promoting the regulation of law” which should be read as veiled threats against Poland and Hungary. To this point the message that ‘imports into the European Union must comply with our standards of safety, human rights, Environmental protection and social standardsIt’s okay. ” This means supporting the EU Customs Protectionism programme, under the pretext of the alleged carbon duty, collected from exporters from countries which do not recognise the principles of EU climate policy. I think both authors wanted to sale this to their recipients as a protection of democracy and the regulation of law (sic!).
After calculating these points, we have a repeated expression from the alleged Scholz ultimatum for Poland, which we have already written here: the enlargement of the EU to Ukraine in exchange for the abolition of the veto in the EU Council. Both authors write: “We are striving for fast and concrete advancement in the enlargement process. At the same time, we must guarantee that the enlarged European Union remains capable of action, with more effective institutions and faster decision-making processes, in peculiar through extension of the vote by qualified majority CouncilIt’s okay. ”
The nonsubjective emerging from the text is clear: the creation of a national EU, without the right of a veto of national states, whose authoritative ideology will be climateism, besides justifying further centralisation of power by EU authorities. Poland and Hungary were announced pacification, with PiS being promised a carrot in the form of a promise to enter the EU of Ukraine.
Adam Wielomski
