South Caucasus in the crosshairs of the European Peace Facility War to some is a boon to others

We have already written about the speech of European Commissioner for Foreign Affairs Josep Borrell. In today's piece, we would like to highlight one detail in the agenda of the main European diplomat. Among other things, Borrel said: "We have decided to strengthen the mission in Armenia by increasing the number of officers and patrols in the most vulnerable border regions. And we will consider possible support to Armenia within the framework of the European Peace Fund, as well as liberalisation of the visa regime for Armenia".

It seems that the statement is quite peaceful. Out of the three mentioned points, the first one is about strengthening the presence of the Armenian people on the ground (some of them with weapons), and the last one does not refer at all to the issues of peace and war, it refers only to visa regime, tourism, work and other perks. The paragraph lurking between them about support within the framework of the European Peace Facility, given the name of the organisation, attracts the attention of the audience to some "all good things". Meanwhile, it is in this paragraph that the most dangerous thing lurks. It is enough not to be fooled by the sweet-talking name of the mentioned organisation and to find out more about what this European Peace Facility (EPF) actually is.

On the website of the European Union, the organisation is defined as follows: "The European Peace Facility is an extra-budgetary instrument that empowers the EU as a global security actor. It was established in March 2021 to preserve peace, prevent conflict and maintain international security."

So far, as we can see, nothing concrete. Preserving peace, preventing conflicts and maintaining international security - this is almost word for word a re-definition of one of the main missions of the United Nations. However, it is known that the UN has a peacekeeping contingent. So the Europeans want something similar. However, if the authorisation of a UN peacekeeping mission is sometimes impossible - the consent of all five permanent members of the Security Council, it is obvious that Europe, being an ideologically and civilizationally homogeneous club, can solve these issues in a simplified order.

Still, even here everything is not so simple. It is not for nothing that the organisation is called a Facility. This implies that it manages money (for which it can buy weapons from the same Western corporations), but (at least for now) not personnel.

Even this simple comparison leads to a guess that the point of the organisation is not to send Europeans to die in war but to supply weapons to other countries so that "non-Europeans" die there for European values.

However, there is no need to waste time on speculation. The EU website explains bluntly: "Through the EPF, the EU has the opportunity to provide military equipment to improve the security and defence capabilities of its partners. In addition to the training provided to partners, the EPF also allows the EU to provide equipment subject to strict protection and control mechanisms."

The Fund replaced the ATHENA mechanism, which previously financed all EU military missions outside Europe. It is formed by contributions from EU member states based on their GDP. The new fund allows for a wider geography of military assistance, while the old mechanism provided it only to "peacekeeping" operations in Africa and the Mediterranean. With the help of the EPF, the EU can supply military equipment and build defence infrastructure at the request of third countries, help partner countries to conduct "peacekeeping" operations or improve the combat capability of their own armed forces "anywhere in the world".

The fund has a total budget of €7.9 billion for the period 2021-2027. Ukraine received the bulk of the Fund (€4.6 billion, discussed below), while Georgia, Moldova, Mozambique and others were also among the recipients. In particular, in May this year, it was announced that Moldova will receive 40 million euros from the fund over 36 months for technical training of the military, as well as the purchase of equipment for transport, logistics, command and control, cyber defence and airspace surveillance. Similarly, Georgia will receive €30 million, also over 36 months. The money will be used for technical training, command and control, medical, logistics and cyber defence equipment.

The mechanism was intended as one of the steps to distance Europe from US hegemony in security matters, and a cautious precursor to its armed forces. In practice, however, it looks somewhat different. "If you can't counter something, lead it," goes the saying. It looks very much like the US has let the Europeans have their fun and play war games, but recent events over Ukraine and Armenia demonstrate that control over EU military initiatives is still being exercised from Washington. Moreover, the White House even benefits from having certain ambiguous aspects of the collective West's foreign policy associated with Brussels, Paris and Berlin rather than with it.

A dozen more such Facilities and organisations could be created but against the backdrop of the states' unsophisticated play on the contradictions between "old" and "new" Europe, as well as Washington's artfully created illusion of choice for Europe - either confrontation with Russia or participation in joint security projects, all the actions of these institutions will play into America's hands.

If we try to see the essence behind formulations and assumptions, it can be expressed as follows: The West uses poor and developing countries as its proxy forces for war against its strategic adversaries. And if the EU announces support for Armenia through this fund, it means the following - the West has already publicly appointed Armenia as the next conflict hotbed for Russia. That is, as we can see, the role of proxies in the modern world can be fulfilled not only by armed groups and private military companies but also by individual states.

Starting in 2022, the war in Ukraine has become a major consumer of the Fund. So much so that Borrell even stated this summer that the European Peace Fund could be transformed into the Ukrainian Defence Fund. Now, as we see, the Western alliance is going to drag Armenia into its military concept as well. It will be quite interesting, by the way, if the Fund is renamed while assisting Armenia as well. The Ukraine-Armenia nexus will manifest itself without any conventions. We can say that the work has already started. More and more often Armenia is being called, like Ukraine, an outpost of democracy. However, all this talk is for romantics who do not want to see the cynical geopolitical essence of the West's policy.

Now the Ukrainian establishment, having seen that the gentlemen are not ready to provide decisive assistance for the success of the counter-offensive, continues to appeal to the value "beacons" in the heads of the Western elite. The Ukrainians position themselves not only as defenders but ideally as reformers of the European project. There is some truth in their words. However, by doing so, they only intimidate the Western establishment, which does not need a reformed Europe with a strong Ukraine. They want everything to be the same old way. The West does not let Ukraine win or lose - it needs the war to continue.

However, Kyiv has no other choice now. The war has gone too far and it has to play to the end (which, alas, is not visible). However, Yerevan still has a way out. Just think about it - Ukrainian events are happening in real time, and you only have time to watch and learn.

But Pashinyan is confidently dragging the country into the abyss of a big war. Although, for him, it is also a kind of no-win situation. Having come to power on the money of Western sponsors, he is working off their discourse. Theoretically, he could "get off the hook" and pursue a more independent policy. For example, not to quarrel with Russia. Or, in general, act without patrons, for example, negotiate peace with Azerbaijan in Tbilisi. But not everyone can let themselves off the hook, especially when they are in a highly dependent position. And if earlier Pashinyan could somehow justify to his Western patrons his flirting with Russia by the fact that he had to operate on the Karabakh issue, which is sensitive to his electorate, now that Moscow has been unable to counter Baku's determination to put an end to the illegal junta and fully restore its sovereignty over Karabakh, the Western pressure on Yerevan has increased even more.

Against the backdrop of growing anti-Russian sentiment in Armenian society, it has become even more difficult for Pashinyan to pursue a balanced policy, and events seem to have become irreversible.

Well, if a raving lunatic has joined the company of sane people, the task of sane people, forgetting about contradictions among themselves, is to neutralise the lunatic. That is what the countries of the region must do now. Neutralise violent Armenia. Azerbaijan has done its part.