MOMENT OF TEST

The European Union (EU) and Brussels officials have been put to serious tests this year. In response to the Ukrainian developments, the EU joined the sanctions war on Russia initiated by Washington. Despite objections by some European countries, military and political solidarity eventually played a deciding role. Later, it became clear that Brussels' actions were not only the result of European unanimity in the face of a potential Russian threat. Speaking at the School of Public Administration at Harvard University, US Vice President Joe Biden described how the EU got involved in the sanctions war on Russia. "Washington then decided that Russia must pay a high price for interfering in the situation in Ukraine. This would have been impossible without the involvement of other Western countries in the sanctions. The president of the United States... sometimes even had to embarrass Europe to take economic hits and make Russia pay," the vice president said.

The White House, in the person of Joe Biden, once again effectively did a disservice to the EU. For the latter, with its defective political appendage, it is a problematic thing to create itself the image of an independent subject of international law anyway. It is noteworthy that even the leaders of leading European countries did not react to the statements by the US vice president and let high-ranking EU officials do so. Only two of the latter responded to Joe Biden's speech. Maja Kocijancic, spokeswoman for the EU foreign policy chief, said that the European Union had taken that fateful decision independently and unanimously. Catherine Ashton's successor on the post, former Italian Foreign Minister Federica Mogherini, spoke in a similar vein: "The EU's sanctions policy towards Russia is based on European unity, and not on pressure from the United States." Incidentally, speaking at the newly-elected European Parlia-ment (EP) in early September, Mogherini accused Moscow of constantly dishonouring its commitments and noted the need for an in-depth review of EU-Russia relations for the next five years. At the same time, she stressed that Russia is no longer a strategic partner for Europe but continues to be of strategic importance on the old continent.

Thus, Mogherini effectively outlined Brussels' foreign policy regarding Moscow during her term on the post of EU foreign policy chief. Interestingly, current European Council President Herman Van Rompuy and European Commission (EC) President Jose Manuel Barroso, as well as their successors, Donald Tusk and Jean-Claude Juncker, were completely silent about the controversial statement Joe Biden made. Doesn't it follow from this that silence means consent. Especially as they have always been invariably pro-American. For example, Jean-Claude Juncker, the president-elect of the European Commission, a former prime minister of Luxembourg, and the head of the Eurogroup, is not only an ardent supporter of the strengthening of European integration, but also a supporter of the transatlantic alliance treaty (the US-EU free trade zone agreement). Some analysts argue that the project is adored by Jean-Claude Juncker, who is referred to as a European hawk, a supporter of violent suppression of pro-nation leaders and elites of countries that oppose European unity with isolationism policies. It is fairly obvious that the EC president used all of his influence to get like-minded people elected as European commissi-oners. His plans could have been prevented by resistance from radicals, both right- and left-wing, who greatly strengthened their positions in the most recent election to the EP. Although centre-rightists, whose protege Juncker is, were in the majority, it took them a lot of effort to neutralize the eurosceptic sentiment of nationalists in the EP, who demanded a decisive revision of European treaties.

However, the EU's legislature had previously delivered some surprises regarding candidates for EU commissioners. In particular, the EP Committee on Culture opposed the endorsement of Hungarian Tibor Navracsics for the post of European commissioner for culture. MEPs were also to a certain extent sceptical about several more candidates. Germans, who are pedantic about finance, had serious doubts regarding, inter alia, the candidacy of Pierre Moscovici for the post of European commissioner for economic affairs. Back when Moscovici was France's finance minister, he failed to curb the growth of the budget deficit in his country. Most probably, there will be quite a few questions for Briton Jonathan Hill, a member of the Financial Committee, regarding his lobbying activities in London's banking sector. Cecilia Malmstrom, the commissioner for home affairs and also an active participant in the negotiations on the US-EU transatlantic alliance, is suspected of making excessive concessions to US initiatives. Initially, even Mogheri-ni's candidacy was viewed with suspicion because of her insufficient experience in international affairs. However, her critical rhetoric against Moscow most probably predetermined MEPs' liking for her. They also gave their support to Miguel Arias Canete, a Spanish aristocrat and politician, whom the president of the European Commission nominated for the post of European commissioner for energy.

So, we can say that economic affairs went to France, the finance sector went to the UK, foreign policy went to Italy, and Germany took over influence on digital economics. Nevertheless, the EC president-elect and members of his team are facing challenges not only regarding tackling current problems, but also regarding strengthening integration processes which are currently experiencing serious attacks from nationalists in some European countries. In addition, British Prime Minister David Cameron, who always speaks in favour of limiting Brussels' powers, periodically voices the idea of holding a referendum on his country's exit from the EU.

In the near future, a serious test awaits the new EU commissioner for energy, Canete. He just must settle the Russian-Ukrainian gas dispute. Otherwise, in the winter Europe may face difficulties with gas supplies. Canete inherited the problem from his predecessor, Gunther Oettinger, who, basically, was not bad on his job until recently.

Meanwhile, one can hardly commend the activities of Stefan Fule, the outgoing commissioner for European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) and enlargement negotiations. The efficiency of the commission was very insignificant throughout the period of his leadership. This is clearly evidenced by the Ukrainian crisis, the postponement of the provisional application of the Association Agreement with Ukraine in the part regarding a deeper and comprehensive free trade zone, and the effective termination of the Eastern Partnership programme. Perhaps that is why the new European commissioner for ENP and enlargement negotiations, Johannes Hahn, has said that ENP should be able to respond to crises more quickly and effectively. Due to the fact that the EU's neighbour countries are too different, a differentiated approach to those countries is very important, depending on the kind of the situation there. He promised to ensure that Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine receive support developed for each of them separately, in order to continue the process of political and economic reform and establishing close ties with the EU.

When he stated the intention of a differentiated approach, Hahn, figuratively speaking, did not discover America. The world has repeatedly seen these kinds of moves by Brussels, but in a negative context. Especially when it comes to interpretation of international legal norms and the territorial integrity of one or another country. And, actually, there are also serious doubts about the support promised by Hahn to the above-mentioned countries. Just a couple of weeks ago, a European Parliament group led by the leader of France's Front National, Marine Le Pen, formed a blocking minority in the trade committee and blocked the procedure for an accelerated approval of the prolongation of autonomous preferential treatment in the EU's trade with Ukraine. All of this suggests that the new high-ranking officials in Brussels will have to work hard to tackle problems that pose a serious threat to unity within the EU and discredit it as an independent and objective political actor on the global arena.