The crisis in the EU and new challenges Transatlantic fault lines

There are indeed some very interesting nuances unfolding today on the European continent. Proof of this can be easily seen in the direction of the report published a few days ago by the Civil Liberties Union for Europe titled "The Rule of Law." This is an annual report, typically spanning 1,000 pages. The current edition, the sixth in a series, as highlighted by Western sources, is the result of cooperation between 43 human rights organizations from 21 EU countries. 

We draw attention to these numbers simply because it is obvious that such a report is not prepared in a single day, week, or month. However, upon closer examination of the text, it becomes apparent that, most likely, some of the conclusions were prepared shortly before publication. Moreover, as implausible as it may seem, the foundation of these conclusions appears to be in agreement with certain thoughts expressed by U.S. Vice President JD Vance during the February Munich Security Conference. Therefore, it seems to be a kind of response to his individual remarks.

In light of the above, let's recall that Vance identified the main threat to the European continent not as external factors but as "the retreat of Europe from some of its most fundamental values—values shared with the United States of America." He revealed that "Everything from our Ukraine policy to digital censorship is billed as a defense of democracy," while in reality, "European courts canceling elections and senior officials threatening to cancel others." In this context, he emphasized the need for concrete actions rather than "talk about democratic values," since "you can’t mandate innovation or creativity, just as you can’t force people what to think, what to feel, or what to believe." Following this, Vance expressed confusion over the threats from European commissioners "to shut down social media during times of civil unrest" in response to what they refer to as "hateful content." Voicing concerns about the retreat of freedom in the name of truth, the U.S. vice president expressed deep conviction that "there is no security if you are afraid of the voices, the opinions, and the conscience that guide your very own people." "If you’re running in fear of your own voters, there is nothing America can do for you," Vance stated. "Dismissing people, dismissing their concerns, or, worse yet, shutting down media, shutting down elections, or shutting people out of the political process protects nothing. In fact, it is the most surefire way to destroy democracy."

On this note, we can now return to the Civil Liberties Union for Europe report mentioned earlier. It primarily highlights the "a general deterioration” of the rule of law across the EU, including anti-corruption measures and media freedom throughout the bloc, which, according to one of the authors of the report, Viktor Z. Kazai, the European Union fails to respond decisively enough. The report's conclusions specifically note the "lack of transparency" in the fight against corruption and the threat to media freedom in many countries, as political influence undermines the independence of regulatory bodies, and the concentration of ownership hinders pluralism. The document also highlights the adoption of "restrictive laws" by governments, including those concerning the right to peaceful protest, freedom of assembly, and association.

And this is where it gets particularly interesting. According to the report, the aforementioned "internal challenges are unfolding against a shifting geopolitical landscape," which is manifested in "the rise of far-right populism, democratic backsliding in the U.S." It is precisely this first factor, combined with the decline in transatlantic support for European security, that deepens the crisis of the rule of law in Europe, calling into question the stability of the bloc. In this context, it is noted that the "far-right’s growing influence threatens EU unity, while Russia’s war on Ukraine and declining transatlantic support for European security test the bloc’s resilience."

The question arises: if we even consider the possibility that the points in the Civil Liberties Union for Europe report regarding right-wing parties were prepared in advance, rather than in light of the support for this political branch from figures close to Donald Trump, such as Elon Musk, can we agree that the report's conclusions about the destruction of transatlantic unity were not simply an addition to an already completed document? After all, if we call things by their proper names, the trend of "declining transatlantic support for European security" clearly became evident less than two months ago. Therefore, certain political circles must have found it timely to include this point in the report, and to make it one of the key points about the weakening of democratic principles in Europe. Simultaneously, the report also noted a rollback of democracy in the United States. It is quite obvious that this phrase could not have appeared in the context of developments under the Biden administration. Thus, this point may have been added to the Civil Liberties Union for Europe report at the last moment.

In any case, the report has been presented. And one cannot deny that the inclusion of the fact that the "bloc" (whether the EU or NATO) is being tested for resilience is significant. This marks a transitional moment for the Euro-Atlantic space. Perhaps this very examination period (and we emphasize, perhaps) was the reason why certain points were added to the report at the last moment.