Is the EU under external attack or is it assisted suicide?

The EU, between external siege and strategic self-harm

The idea that the European Union is under attack is gaining ground in sceptical circles. The debate is split between those who see an external conspiracy – mainly by Russia and the United States – and those who argue that Brussels has become its own worst enemy. Both camps agree that the European project is going through its most fragile moment since the euro crisis.

The energy siege argument

Europe's energy dependence is the core of the first thesis. It points out that the EU funds Ukraine's weaponry while its gas suppliers cut off the tap, a contradiction that benefits third parties. The question hanging in the air is who really suffers the shortage: the end consumer or the big corporations? Fifth-generation wars, the argument goes, are no longer won with tanks but with sanctions and energy flows.

The internal autopsy: bureaucracy and dependence

The second view points to the Union itself as the source of the problem. It is described as a bureaucratic construct where each state lives off its own perks – the UK with its Commonwealth, Germany with its patents, France with its national champions – while southern Europe is reduced to a dispensable mere consumer. The decision to decarbonise at all costs, demolishing thermal and nuclear plants, is presented as an example of strategic self-harm. The detail of English as the unofficial official language is mentioned as a symptom of a diluted identity.

A dead end

Between conspiracy theories and systemic criticism, the debate stalls on an uncomfortable realisation: the EU seems incapable of articulating an autonomous response. While some hope Iran or China will show the way, others predict that the northern elites will kick out the dependent countries once they become a nuisance. The missing piece of data is whether the attack comes from outside or within; but the chronicle of a disunion is already written.