Sounds to me like that would be a very expensive choice that would severely affect the quality of life of EU voters. Since those in a position to impose sanctions are those who play the game of getting elected, I don’t think that it is in their best interest to tank the economy.
Because the US is a closer ally and the EU was forced to pick a side. The EU did not move spontaneously and alone, it moved as part of coordinated action. Furthermore, Russia launched a direct attack into European territory, making it a much more direct military threat.
What you are proposing here is different. You are asking the EU to spontaneously and unilaterally decide to go after its most powerful ally because of the human rights violations that they are committing somewhere else.
What I’m saying here is that EU is very selective about whose rights it cares about. Objectively speaking, US has been engaged in massacring millions of people around the globe since WW2. A few recent atrocities include Libya, Syria, Afghanistan, and Iraq. These alone have killed and displaced countless millions.
Given that EU has never put any sanctions on US or taken any other meaningful action, the only logical conclusion here is that the only reason EU put sanctions on Russia is cynical self interest.
Furthermore, there was no reason for EU and Russia to be in a confrontation or for Russia to present a military threat to EU. The whole reason for this situation is the fact that NATO has been steadily expanding east towards Russia. EU is entirely complicit in creating the situation it finds itself in today.
It’s more accurate to describe the relationship between US and EU as one between an empire and a vassal than one between allies. The war in Ukraine and the economic fallout have directly harmed EU while bolstering US. If EU had sovereignty then EU leaders would have been prioritizing the interests of people living in EU as opposed to the interests of the empire.
Add comment