EU-Russia geopolitical clash Democratic expansion vs. authoritarian influence

The clash between the European Union (EU) and Russia over their respective spheres of influence has emerged as a defining narrative. While the EU seeks to expand its sphere through democratic integration and shared sovereignty, Russia pursues influence through coercion, regional organisations under its control, and direct military actions.

The Kremlin views the EU’s potential to drive significant political transformation with concern.

Following the historic gains of far-right and Eurosceptic parties in the June European Parliament elections, which now comprise nearly a quarter of the chamber, these groups are positioned to wield substantial influence over the EU's future political direction, Caliber.Az reports citing the foreign media.

They advocate for scaling back integration efforts and oppose further enlargement of the bloc.

From Moscow's perspective, this outcome is seen as a reason for optimism. Several prominent Russian figures praised the ascendance of right-wing parties within the EU post-elections, with former President Dmitry Medvedev suggesting that pro-EU leaders should be consigned to history's dustbin. Russia actively supported Euroskeptic parties in the lead-up to the elections, offering financial backing, amplifying Kremlin-aligned narratives through politicians, and conducting extensive online disinformation campaigns and cyberattacks on critical websites.

Moreover, with Hungary currently holding the EU presidency, Moscow is working to assist Viktor Orban, a pro-Russia leader, in undermining the EU's unified stance on Russia's conflict in Ukraine.

Russia's recent actions mark a significant escalation in its efforts to undermine the EU. Historically harboring animosity towards the bloc, Moscow's hostility has intensified amid heightened tensions with the West. The Kremlin perceives the EU's ongoing expansion and deepening integration as a critical and increasingly urgent threat to its efforts to promote an illiberal governance model, both domestically and internationally.

Unlike NATO, it is the EU that poses the true existential threat to the Kremlin. This is primarily due to the potential impact of Ukraine's integration into the EU, which could deal a severe blow to Russian President Vladimir Putin and his regime. Such integration could transform Ukraine into a political, economic, and socio-cultural alternative to Russia itself—an outcome Moscow vehemently opposes. Despite Putin's enduring popularity within Russia, there is concern within the Kremlin that Russian citizens may increasingly view the benefits of EU membership across the border and aspire to a different future for their own country.

That's an insightful analysis. It highlights Putin's strategic concerns over Ukraine's alignment with the EU and the implications of its potential integration. The narrative contrasts with the often-cited theory that NATO enlargement was the primary catalyst for Kremlin aggression in Ukraine, a viewpoint supported by figures such as John Mearsheimer, Stephen M. Walt, Tucker Carlson, Nigel Farage, and former US President Donald Trump. These voices have emphasized NATO's role in the geopolitical dynamics, overshadowing the complexities of EU-Russian relations in Western discourse.

Underlying these arguments for Russia's actions is the premise that the Kremlin views NATO's eastward expansion as a potential threat to its strategic interests. However, Putin's motivations appear less about direct military threat and more about geopolitical influence and ideological preservation. Despite assertions that Russia feels justified in its concerns about NATO's proximity, evidenced by its redeployment of troops away from NATO borders to Ukraine, Putin's broader concern revolves around maintaining influence over neighboring states and preserving what he perceives as Russia's sphere of influence.

For Putin, EU enlargement poses a distinct challenge, particularly to his policy of maintaining control over Russia's periphery. This contrasts sharply with the EU's objective of shared sovereignty and mutual influence among member states, facilitated through complex institutional frameworks designed to ensure equitable decision-making. Thus, while NATO's expansion is often cited as a concern for Russia's security, Putin's strategic maneuvers suggest a deeper concern about maintaining influence and ideological control over neighboring states, rather than a direct military threat from the West.

Russia diverges significantly from the EU in its approach to neighboring countries, aiming to exert control and influence through both direct and indirect means, including military actions like those in Ukraine and coercive tactics such as corruption. Russian-led regional bodies such as the Collective Security Treaty Organization and the Eurasian Economic Union serve primarily as tools for Moscow to impose its agenda on neighboring states rather than fostering genuine collaboration.

The Kremlin's apprehensions about EU influence are grounded in the EU's proven ability to instigate profound political transformations. Since the end of the Cold War, EU membership has played a pivotal role in shaping former autocratic regimes in Central and Eastern Europe into vibrant liberal democracies. This transformative effect is deliberate, as EU accession criteria demand that new members uphold principles of democracy, rule of law, human rights, and minority protections—values that sharply contrast with those promoted by the Russian government.

Over the years, Russia's opposition to EU enlargement has solidified as it has witnessed the EU's transformative impact on neighboring states. Initially viewing the bloc through an economic lens, Moscow has increasingly perceived EU expansion as a geopolitical challenge, especially following the accession of countries like the Baltic states, Czech Republic, Poland, and Slovakia in 2004.