In today’s world “we see more conflict and less cooperation. More polarity it’s less multilateralism. The international system we were used to after Cold War it no longer exists. Over the last decade, America has lost its hegemonic status indisputable. And the post-1945 multilateral order is losing ground.” These are not the words of the Chinese president Xi Jinpingthe first to hope for the birth of a new one multipolar world order. They’re not even those of Vladimir Putinhis “friend”, but above all the one who, invading Ukrainehe exposed himself personally precisely to take away from Washington the scepter of a great world power. To make these statements in front of the students of Oxford he is instead the head of European diplomacy, the one who, together with the leaders of the 27 member states, dictates the EU’s line in foreign policy: the High Representative (CFSP) Joseph Borrell.
It is true that in about a month Europe will go to elections, with the composition of the Commission also being totally changed, but also for this reason the positions expressed by Borrell, who always speaks from mr Pesc in office, they can be considered more ‘sincere’ and free from the attention and caution required of diplomats. If this were the case, however, they indicate that even among the main historical allies of the United States a change of balance in international politics is considered already existing and inevitable. “There Chinese – explained Borrell – has risen to the status of superpowerrivaling the United States and Europe not only in manufacturing, but also in military power and in the construction of technologies that shape our future. And ‘friendship without limits’ with Russia signals a growing alignment of authoritarian regimes. At the same time, the average powers like Indiail Brazil, Saudi Arabiail South Africa o to Türkiye are emerging as major players on the global stage. They have few characteristics in common, other than the desire for greater status and a stronger voice in the world, as well as greater benefits for their own development. To achieve this, they are maximizing their autonomy, balancing their bets and not taking sides.”
A factor, in addition to the economic rise of many of the countries mentioned, is also the loss of international credibility of the so-called Western bloc. The numerous wars, the broken promises and, Borrell points out, the double standards in relating to major international issues, they have created mistrust in countries that, years ago, looked to the United States and Europe as models to follow. To be able to unite the world around the “values and principles” inscribed in the Charter of United Nations, explained Borrell, “we must demonstrate that we Europeans respect them always and everywhere. We are doing it? Not to the extent we should. And for Europe this is a problem. Everywhere I go, I find myself confronted with the accusation of using double standards. People have not forgotten the war in Iraq, although some important EU Member States did not participate. But some participated very enthusiastically and others quickly withdrew. What is happening now at Gaza it gave an image of Europe that many simply don’t understand. They have seen our resolve in Ukraine and are wondering how we will deal with it Palestine. The perception is that we value civilian lives more in Ukraine than in Gaza, where more than 34 thousand people diedmost of the others are displaced and children are dying of hunger. And the perception is that we care less if UN Security Council resolutions are violated by Israelas happens repeatedly when they are built settlements and Palestinians are being forced from their lands, with an increasing level of violence, compared to when international law is violated by Russia.”
This does not mean that one should have a less rigorous attitude with Mosca. Far from it. Borrell, since the beginning of the invasion of Ukraine, has been among the staunchest supporters of strategy of firmness towards Vladimir Putinbut in his speech he underlines how the same iron fist was not used, for example, against Netanyahu and his government for the massacre that they are leading to Gaza. As proof of his position there are his words that, even in his speech to Oxfordunderline how “Vladimir Putin’s Russia represents a existential threat for all of us. If Putin succeeds in Ukraine, he won’t stop there. This is now also the thought of the French president Emmanuel Macron who initially warned that it was not necessary humiliate Russia“, he then added, implicitly declaring himself in favor of the positions recently expressed by the head ofElysiumaccording to which it cannot be excluded the sending of European troops to Ukraine to fight against Putin’s army. The rigid attitude which, according to him, would be necessary, however, is not possible due to the unanimity required during the EU Council. And in this regard, Borrell points the finger at it Hungary and the veto strategy of Viktor Orban: “You know as well as I do that there are EU member states that still do not share this assessment. And, in a Union governed by unanimity, our policies towards Russia are always threatened by a single veto, as Viktor Orban demonstrated by delaying our latest aid package to Ukraine. In the United States, however, political polarization delayed the military assistance package by six months.”