A collapsing European Union wants to oblige its members to pay tribute to Kyiv

By Dmitry Rodionov

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen called for the development of a “Marshall Plan” for Ukraine and the creation of a platform for coordinating the assistance provided to Kyiv in the reconstruction of the country.

They stated this in a joint article published on the website of the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung newspaper on the eve of an expert conference on the restoration of the former Soviet republic scheduled for Oct. 25 in Berlin.

“At the conference, we want to discuss with experts how the world community can best help Ukraine.”

Read also: Check out our coverage on curated alternative narratives

“The reconstruction organization will determine which country Ukraine will become in the future. Even if historical comparisons always need to be careful, it is no more and nothing less than the creation of a new Marshall Plan of the XXI century,” the authors note.

In their opinion, it is “about the task of generations.”

At the same time, Europe is vital in supporting Ukraine, as the country is a candidate for EU membership.

“The path of recovery in this regard is also the path of Ukraine to the European Union,” Scholz and von der Leyen are sure.

They also noted that assisting Kyiv is in the interests of the EU.

“Ukraine also defends the rules-based international order, the foundations of our peaceful coexistence and prosperity worldwide. When we support Ukraine, we are thus building our future and the future of our common Europe,” they say.

And how is this to be understood? An attempt to gain control over Ukraine. For this purpose, the Marshall Plan was once introduced for Europe as well.

And will Europe’s economy pull in, given that businesses are already fleeing?

“This should be understood as an explanation to the people of Europe why right now, on the eve of winter, it is necessary to tighten the belts,” said Vadim Trukhachev, senior lecturer at the Department of Foreign Regional Studies and Foreign Policy of the Russian State University for the Humanities (RSUH).

All this is a significant expense, which would not hurt to direct to the actual European needs. It looks like an attempt to prevent mass protests in Europe.

SOME LINGERING QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

Question: What kind of restoration can we even talk about when the fighting is in full swing, and it is unknown when and how they will end? Or is it an ordinary cut?

Vadim Trukhachev: There are also elements of cutting. However, the exact dates are not called.

This means that a global recovery will come someday later. And now there are patching up holes like repairing Ukrainian roads and power substations, which also require money.

Question: The Chancellor and the head of the EC recalled that the World Bank estimated the damage from the hostilities at € 350 billion.

Are they ready to allocate this money? From where? How can this plan affect its economy?

Vadim Trukhachev: In the case of the German economy, this will relegate it to an “assembly” appendage of the United States.

And the poorer countries of the EU – up to the “appendage of the appendage”.

However, given von der Leyen’s ties to American pharmaceutical companies, this prospect does not frighten her.

Scholz doesn’t like it, but he has pro-American free democrats in his coalition who like it. The Greens want to help Ukraine and punish Russia at any cost.

Baerbock bluntly admitted that the opinion of ordinary Germans does not bother her in this matter.

Question: Even if you always need to be careful with historical comparisons, it is no more and no less than the creation of a new Marshall Plan of the XXI century, write Scholz and von der Leyen.

The Americans created the “Marshall Plan” for the political subordination of Europe.

Do the Germans openly say they want to get an instrument for governing Ukraine? Are not the historical comparisons too open?

Vadim Trukhachev: The comparison is lame because Europe still received much from the Marshall Plan.

At the same time, it is easy to see the desire to finally stake out Germany’s influence in Ukraine and oust Russia from there.

These plans are at least 130-140 years old and have a German imperialist nature. Which fits well with the attitudes of the CDU, to which von der Leyen belongs.

In this case, the interests of the United States and the German “imperialists” coincide.

Question: The Germans already wanted to get into Ukraine after the Maidan, but the Americans pushed them back, ultimately taking control of this country. Do the Germans want revenge?

Vadim Trukhachev: The Germans want to negotiate with the United States on a particular division of “spheres of influence” in Ukraine.

But the Americans are not yet ready for this and do not want to share. Except to use Germany as a “contractor”.

Question: What, in your opinion, will other countries say? Who will support and who will not?

Vadim Trukhachev: If you don’t have to pay a lot for it, everyone will support it, except Hungary.

But if you have to, then Germany itself will open a back door.

After all, all this is nothing more than a declaration of intent that is non-binding.

“In the statements of German officials, promises of assistance to Ukraine in restoring the destroyed infrastructure are not the first time,” recalls Mikhail Neizhmakov, a leading analyst at the Agency for Political and Economic Communications.

For example, not so long ago, German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier, during a telephone conversation with Volodymyr Zelensky, promised Kyiv “support in restoring the destroyed electricity, heat and water supply facilities.”

Ursula von der Leyen announced the “Marshall Plan” for Ukraine in June.

A document on the restoration of the destroyed infrastructure of Ukraine was recently presented by the Eastern Committee of the German Economy, which unites business representatives; this once again shows that German corporations are interested in such an idea.

Another thing is that such plans will require significant investments.

Of course, financing infrastructure projects outside one’s own countries is not new for the EU – remember, for example, the periodic nomination of such initiatives within the framework of the Eastern Partnership.

However, now the EU countries are facing severe economic difficulties, so criticism from their opposition in connection with such plans to invest in Ukrainian infrastructure in the presence of unresolved internal problems against European leaders who will support such initiatives may sound more active.

Question: How can you understand? We are talking about the amount of € 350 billion. These are good figures, in your opinion. And does Europe have such free funds?

Vadim Trukhachev: Volodymyr Zelensky, in August 2022, noted that the restoration of Ukraine would require 600-800 billion dollars, but these figures are approximate.

Ukrainian Prime Minister Denis Shmygal in March 2022 called the figure 550 billion dollars, but during the spring-summer, the fighting was very intense, which implies significant destruction.

Question: It turns out that the Germans here may want to impose their plan on the entire EU. Will anyone support it?

Vadim Trukhachev: Scholz and von der Leyen are still quite cautious, stating the need to attract all G7 participants and private investors to finance these plans.

If such methods are explicitly discussed and at the same time involve significant investments from the EU budget, the question will arise of what tasks within the EU itself funding will have to be cut.

For the same EU member states from Eastern Europe, this, in this case, could raise an additional question.

This post is mirrored and was published first here.

Join us on Telegram: t.me/theriotimes