Crisis of diplomacy

The institutions of the European Union and its political representatives - notwithstanding this - still speak of a "European peace project". In 2012, the European Union was even awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for "contributing to the advancement of peace and reconciliation, democracy and human rights in Europe".

There is no longer any talk of that today. This became very impressively clear at the Munich Security Conference in mid-February. In Munich, it was established that European security is inextricably linked to US security in all areas - economy, defence, intelligence, law, humanitarian affairs, digital space and logistics. The European states are well on their way to robbing themselves of any sovereignty in blind fulfilment of this agenda, thereby burdening future generations with an enormous costs - politically, militarily, economically and socially.

Concrete measures such as the European Peace Facility speak a clear language: Now it is taking its revenge that the European Union has "delegated" its foreign and security policy to NATO and is pursuing a defence and security policy agenda that naturally cannot coincide with the circle of member states. NATO's security interests dominate, not those of the EU member states. With this interpretation of the Common Foreign and Security Policy by the EU, a dangerous wedge is being driven into its own ranks, especially with regard to neutral states that cannot support NATO policy. This damage is already clearly visible in the policy shift of Sweden and Finland.

The European Union may talk about peace, but it does not act accordingly. If the EU were to measure itself by its own values, it would have to devote all its energy to diplomatic negotiations. However, among many other negative developments that we have had to observe over the past year, the crisis of European diplomacy to keep the peace must be highlighted in particular. Diplomatic meetings of representatives of European member states are increasingly taking on the character of elitist private clubs and are held in parallel with the international organisations set up for this purpose.

International organisations such as the United Nations and the OSCE were founded on the basis of a commonly expressed will. For various reasons, this "common will" is increasingly difficult to achieve today. One of the main causes is globalisation in combination with advancing digitalisation. The rapid change from an initially bipolar and later unipolar system to a now multipolar system has not only shaken the political structures of states, but also their security structures.

In addition to common will, the trust of partners in stability and effectiveness is another important prerequisite for the functioning of international organisations. This trust has been shaken time and again, on the one hand because international organisations have been abused by major political actors for their power interests. On the other hand, the confidence of states in the effectiveness of international treaties has been dwindling for some time. More and more often, international treaties are not respected. Moreover, non-state actors (such as corporations or financial companies) are evading these international treaties.

It is therefore a misguided development to respond to these new challenges with rearmament and unilateral alliance building. The EU is making itself the vicarious agent of its transatlantic partner and it will have to pay the bill in Europe itself. For this reason alone, it would be high time to invest the billions of the European Peace Facility in diplomatic negotiations and the strengthening and renewal of international organisations.