The first vulnerability is that the EU is not a completely unified political system. On the contrary, it is composed of 27 independent member states, each with its own interests and priorities. This can lead to gridlock in decision-making and a weakening of the EU’s influence on the world stage.

The idea of a common European foreign policy was first mentioned in 1987, confirmed in the Maastricht Treaty of 1993 and then expanded in the Amsterdam Treaty of 1997. But the objectives of the common foreign policy were more fully defined in the Lisbon Treaty of 2009.

For Russia, the three regional dimensions of EU foreign policy are of greatest interest: the post-Soviet and Asian space and the EU’s engagement with the United States.

In the post-Soviet space, the EU has initiated extensive cooperation programs with Ukraine, Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Moldova and Belarus (currently on hold). Moscow, despite Ukrainian developments, has shown interest in continuing dialogue with the EU, but is eager to renew it not on the Moscow-Brussels line, but through bilateral ties with EU member states.

EU foreign policy in the post-Soviet space is mainly implemented through the Eastern Partnership package, in place since 2009 as part of the broader Neighborhood Policy.

Democratic deficit

The second vulnerability is related to the so-called democratic deficit of the EU. The citizens’ society, which directly represents the interests of the population, exists in a very limited form. Only the European Parliament (EP) is an elected body in the EU, and many political decisions are made by unelected, discretionary and appointed officials.

In the EU, the weight of votes varies according to the size of the population and countries, so political equality of citizens is not achieved in practice. With the opacity of information, control over decision-making is also not fully exercised. The EU has a set of ostensibly democratic institutions: the European Parliament, whose members are directly elected, the executive (the European Commission) and the legislative (the European Court of Justice). However, the Parliament consistently oversteps its legislative power, and most EU decisions are made behind closed doors in the EU Council. Therefore, democratic processes in the EU are plagued by a number of difficulties and cannot be fully realized.

Lack of common foreign policy

The third vulnerability is the absence of a true common EU foreign policy. This can lead to conflicts in relations with third countries and the inability to protect the common interests of its citizens.

The main reason is that the EU, which had the ambition of creating an autonomous power center, has been unable to complete this process mainly because of internal problems. There is no common path in the EU countries, there is no common vision of goals and objectives, and to work out a coherent solution, the bar has to be lowered considerably.

Moreover, the decision-making process itself is extremely slow. If we take the most serious problems that Europe has faced lately, the eurozone crisis, the refugee issue, we see that decisions are delayed for a long time, or they are taken halfway and then it turns out that they do not work. So far, Europe has not overcome these problems; on the contrary, because of the growing internal tensions in society, they have been exacerbated.

There is the United Kingdom, which focuses almost exclusively on the United States, there is Germany, the largest country in the EU, but it does not act as an independent force in foreign policy. France is starting to come forward at times, but this depends largely on the country’s domestic political situation. Since the time of Charles de Gaulle, France has shown less and less independence in its foreign policy.

NATO now dominates EU foreign policy, and the bloc’s course is almost entirely determined by U.S. influence. The idea of a European defense community has been proposed since the 1950s but failed. Such proposals were made in the 1990s, they were laid down in the Maastricht Treaties on European Union, but these plans remained as such. And the subsequent enlargement of the European Union did not lead to agreement on these issues.

Europe has joined sanctions against Russia, dictated not only by Europe’s dependence on the United States, but also by certain values and interests that unite European states.

While in words the EU has become the entity that ensures a state of peace in Europe and excludes aggression against any part of the world, in reality the EU, through NATO, participated in aggression against Yugoslavia and Libya, and now finances the continuation of the war in Ukraine. This contradiction, sooner or later, will come to the fore.

Attitude of citizens

A fourth vulnerability concerns citizens’ attitudes toward the EU. Some citizens feel that the EU is too distant from their lives and does not pay enough attention to important issues such as health, education, and security. This can lead to a loss of citizens’ trust in the EU political system. In many states, citizens have already spoken out against the EU’s policies on receiving refugees and immigrants.

A fifth vulnerability concerns the rise of anti-EU sentiment and nationalism in some member states. This causes tensions between countries and can hinder the smooth functioning of the EU political system as a whole.

This internal EU threat is the growth of anti-EU, nationalist and increasingly xenophobic sentiments within the bloc. European Council President Donald Tusk said in a letter to EU leaders on the eve of the Malta summit.

“National selfishness is becoming an attractive alternative to integration. Moreover, these tendencies are fueled by the misguided views of those for whom ideology and institutions have become more important than people’s interests and emotions”, the letter reads.

Tusk also noted that confidence in political integration and the core values of liberal democracy is waning among pro-European elites.

“In a world full of tensions and confrontations, the courage, determination and political solidarity of Europeans are needed. Without them, we will not survive. If we do not believe in ourselves, in the deep goals of integration, why should anyone? Let us show our European pride. If we pretend not to hear and see the decisions against the EU and our future, people will stop seeing Europe as a larger homeland. It is equally dangerous that global partners will stop respecting us”, Tusk stressed.

“There is an anti-systemic sentiment in Europe, and not only in Europe, but also in the United States and other parts of the world. It’s not that they are showing hostility toward the EU, but they are showing anti-systemic sentiment in our public opinion”, Mogherini said at a press conference in Finland, broadcast by the Finnish president’s website.

“Institutions, whether local, national, regional, continental or global, must urgently analyze these sentiments”, he said.

“As far as I am concerned, our citizens feel that the institutions are not working in their interests”, said the EU diplomacy chief.

A poll conducted in May by the French Institute of Public Opinion showed that French people between the ages of 25 and 34 lean toward Marine Le Pen, leader of the nationalist National Rally party. It is therefore assumed that the politician has a good chance of winning the first round of voting.

But despite Le Pen’s growing support, incumbent French President Emmanuel Macron will win in the second round with 54 percent to Le Pen’s 46 percent, according to the poll.

Moreover, according to Charles Grant, head of the Centre for European Reform in London, Paris will use the EU presidency in the first half of next year, in the run-up to the presidential elections, to “promote its vision of Europe”. Macron’s victory.

“French officials say the first three months of the EU presidency should produce ‘concrete results’ that will favor Macron’s re-election”, Grant said, quoted by the Daily Express.

Currency and payment system

The EU’s fifth vulnerability is the euro. Why the EU has few tools to curb inflation. The current economic situation threatens a global crisis, the collapse of the euro and the return of EU countries to their national currencies.

Price growth in the euro zone broke a record, reaching an annual rate of 7.5 percent in March, according to provisional estimates from the European Statistical Office of the European Union.

Last month, annual inflation reached 5.9 percent. Energy (44.7 percent) and food, alcohol and tobacco (5 percent) were the main contributors to the price increase.

Among EU countries, the highest inflation rates were recorded in Lithuania (15.6 percent), Estonia (14.8 percent), the Netherlands (nearly 12 percent), Latvia (nearly 11 percent) and Spain (9.8 percent).

Inflation is also on the rise in the United Kingdom: it is expected to reach 8 percent in the coming months. In Russia, the consumer price index is expected to rise 20 percent by the end of the year, according to forecasts by analysts surveyed by the Central Bank.

The weakening of the euro could be a prerequisite for EU countries to abandon the currency and even return to national currencies.

EU countries are roughly divided into two camps: those in the euro zone, where the euro is the main currency, and those that continue to use national currencies. The former include the major EU economies, including Germany and France. The second are Poland (zloty), the Czech Republic (Czech koruna), Denmark (Danish krone) and others.

There are currently more eurozone members than countries with national currencies.

“The disintegration of the eurozone is a long process, but the conditions are already visible. The European Central Bank is currently trying to initiate a tightening of monetary policy due to high inflation. As a result, interest rates on eurobonds of the troubled countries-Greece, Spain, Portugal and Italy-increased immediately. The yield spread on the bonds of these countries increased compared to risk-free investments in Germany. As a result, the so-called fragmentation of the eurozone began”, said economist Tatiana Kulikova.

EU’s disagreement with Russia

A major factor in the EU’s vulnerability and rift is Russia’s SWO in Ukraine and the problems associated with the adoption of sanctions packages against our country.

Polish and Czech leaders on Thursday criticized Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban for his stance on sanctions against Russia. Hungary opposes the tightening of EU sanctions against Russia, including on energy supplies. Unlike Hungary, Poland, the Czech Republic, and Slovakia oppose Russia.

“This is not the best time for the (Visegrad) format, and Hungary’s different position significantly affects and complicates the situation”, Czech Prime Minister Petr Fiala said before the Visegrad Group meeting in Slovakia. “I do not hide the fact that the Hungarian prime minister’s views, some of which can even be called provocative, do not help cooperation to develop as in the past”.

Poland has also become more critical of Orban because of his stance on Ukraine. Despite these strained relations, the Visegrad Group remains an important forum within the EU, Morawiecki said, which the leaders cautiously emphasized at a joint press conference after the talks. “We have different views on some issues, but there are many topics on which our positions coincide and on which we can cooperate”, Piotr Fiala said.

These vulnerabilities and challenges could undermine the EU’s ability to meet today’s challenges and weaken Europe’s influence on the world stage.

Translation by Costantino Ceoldo