In this second opinion piece[1] translated by MEMRI on the tensions between the EU and Russia, Ria Novosti commentator Petr Akopov warns the EU that it risks repeating the mistake of Napoleon and Hitler. Both Napoleon and Hitler united Europe and then proceeded to attack Russia, sustaining defeat and losing power as a result. Their failure strengthened Russia, but the principal beneficiaries were the Anglo-Saxons – first Great Britain and then the United States. The EU is not launching an invasion of Russia but has attached former republics of the USSR and is now sparring with Russia over Ukraine. The result will be increased dependence on the United States that is only to happy to divert European attention towards Russia.
Akopov's article follows below: [2]
"Two hundred years ago, the first architect of a united Europe died, who decided to subjugate Russia to himself, and eighty years ago a united Europe attacked our country again. For our country, the main lesson of the two hundred years that have passed since the death of Napoleon is that united Europe, alas, has mastered nothing in relations with Russia. Napoleon attacked Russia - the answer was the capture of Paris. But the desire to box Russia into a corner, to fragment [it] (or still better, to liquidate [it]) during the post-Napoleonic period animated the Europeans time and again. Moreover, the further united they became, the more this feeling became stronger. And in so doing, they act according to the same scheme.
"Napoleon subdued most of Europe with fire and sword, as well as coronations and dynastic unions - Great Britain remained the sole enemy. By rallying Europe reliably around him, Napoleon would become a mortal threat to the island empire. But instead of a war with her (landing on an island or striking her colonies) the French emperor attacks Russia, is defeated and loses power. United Europe disintegrates - and although Russia increases its influence on European affairs, Britain becomes the real winner, which by increasing its power throughout the 19th century has been building up its power, turns into the number one world power.
"130 years after Napoleon, Hitler united Europe - and again the very same scheme. Instead of a war with his natural adversary, Britain, the Fuhrer attacks Russia - followed by the defeat and the demise of both the Reich and its leader (who passed away on almost the same day as Napoleon). And although the USSR is strengthening its influence in Europe, having gained control over its east, the same Anglo-Saxons become the main beneficiaries - only this time the United States is now in the primary role, to which the burden of world leadership has shifted emperor Great Britain.
"Another half century passes - and against the backdrop of the of the USSR's collapse, Europe begins to unite rapidly. The Anglo-Saxons need a united Europe only as their geopolitical vassal, a junior partner - but the German-French center is gradually preparing for independence. Considering the military, human resources and ideological dependence on the Anglo-Saxons (due, inter alia, to globalization), the European path to independence cannot be easy.
"But even here Europe is marching towards Russia - not with fire and sword (which, in principle, is impossible due to the presence of nuclear weapons), but systematically taking for itself first Eastern Europe, and then the former Soviet republics. Ukraine is becoming a bone of contention between the EU and Russia. And although the initiative to highjack Ukraine belongs to the Anglo-Saxons, the Europeans are involved in this confrontation that embroils them with Russia and benefits the same Anglo-Saxon strategists: they maintain control over Europe and divert its attention to the east."
Petr Akopov (Source: Kavpolit.ru)
[1] See MEMRI Special Dispatch, 9374, Senior Russian Columnist Bovt: Europe's Racist Prejudices Against Russia Are Immutable, If Russians Were Black It Might Be Easier, May 7, 2021.
[2] Ria.ru, May 4, 2021.
