Europe is overestimating its solidarity and global influence in trying to shut out Russia

As Europe faces economic and social uncertainty, it’s clear that leaders have made several false assumptions
They believed the region and the wider world would unite against Russia, that they could easily cut economic ties with Moscow, and that their people would bear the outcome no matter what

Abishur Prakash

Published: 1:00am, 1 Dec 2022

Why you can trust SCMP

In Greece, unions representing 2.5 million workers have gone on an “inflation strike” to protest against the rising cost of living. In France, protests over the state of the economy attracted over 100,000 people. In the Czech Republic, almost 70,000 people demonstrated against the EU and Nato, and called for the Czech government to resign. In Germany, nearly 25,000 people across multiple cities protested against energy prices. It’s a similar story in Romania, Belgium, and Italy.

The protests spreading across Europe today are unlike any that have taken place recently. They are not about human rights or climate change, which only draw out certain groups. Across the continent, Europeans are calling for the same things: bring down prices, solve the energy crisis, and end the war.

It’s becoming clear that the decisions Europe’s leaders made months ago regarding Ukraine are now biting. If protests and strikes are just the beginning, what happens next?

The answer to that depends on the choices made in the coming months. Any effective solution requires the European political class to accept a hard truth: when it comes to the Ukraine war, it miscalculated everything.

First, Europe assumed it could call the shots for the world. From taking control of Russian assets to pressuring other nations to cut their Russian ties, Europe believed it alone could derail the Russian economy, and set a tone that would be followed by everyone else. However, the opposite occurred.

Governments representing just 16 per cent of the global population have sanctioned Russia, meaning few nations have been willing to put Europe’s interests ahead of their own. And, while Europe seeks to “wall off” Russia’s economy, other nations are opening up to Russia in new ways, such as by pricing Russian energy in UAE Dirhams.

Second, Europe assumed its people could withstand the blowback from its actions, while only offering band-aid solutions. This miscalculation has been made clear by the fights breaking out at gas stations in France or Kosovo once again becoming familiar with rolling blackouts. These were once scenes that only appeared in countries labelled “unstable”.

Now, however, fights over fuel and loss of power at random moments are becoming part of the new status quo for Europe. As the blowback increases, and people are forced to take more drastic measures (beyond showering less or wearing an extra jumper), massive social explosions might follow.

Lastly, Europe overestimated how fast it could transition away from Russia. The “hydrogen alliance” that Germany signed with Canada is almost a decade away from materialising. And, to offset energy losses from anti-Russia sanctions, European nations are looking at restarting coal plants. Is “de-sustainability” the new objective for Europe?

Europe is now so desperate for energy that it has begun restricting energy exports that other nations, like India, have paid for. Its new strategy appears to be energy hoarding. And its next headache might be a clash with Asia.

A coal-fired power plant in Lippendorf, Germany, on November 7. Photo: Dpa via AP

Most of Europe’s leaders assumed that a shared ideology (democracy) or shared concern (the humanitarian crisis in Ukraine) would be enough to bring countries into the European corner. And, if most of the world stood united against Moscow, then Russia would capitulate.

These were flawed assumptions. Today, the world is changing, in large part because nations are reclaiming sovereignty and walking away from the established systems and ideas.

Even if Europe changes its strategy overnight, there are some transformations that are here to stay. To start with, Europe is fragmenting. When it comes to defence, French President Emmanuel Macron has said France won’t use nuclear weapons, even if Russia uses them in Ukraine. Is the rest of Nato comfortable with this?

Meanwhile, the Hungarian government is planning a referendum on energy sanctions against Russia. As Europe’s energy crisis worsens, will other European countries hold similar referendums? A new form of nationalism is also rising in Europe. The protests in the Czech Republic were held under the banner of “Czech Republic first”.

Alongside this, Europe’s main allies, on whom Brussels could have depended in the past, are on shaky ground. The UK is focused on internal stability (i.e. London is “war gaming” energy blackouts for up to a week), while attempts by the US to help by releasing oil from its strategic reserves haven’t worked. China, meanwhile, has to date ignored EU calls to mediate in the Ukraine war.

A weary West may push Ukraine to the negotiating table with Russia

Lastly, the world is returning to “isolation” – similar to conditions during the pandemic. Across Europe, nations are more occupied with their internal affairs than external ones. Yet it’s from such conditions in isolation that the Ukraine war emerged in the first place. If Europe is returning to this status quo, then what’s to come once internal challenges are resolved?

As winter begins, the Ukraine war shows no signs of ending. Europe must answer a single question: will it continue supporting Ukraine at the expense of social and economic stability? It’s this question that will define how or when the war ends, and what happens next in the European continent.

But, one thing is for sure: the Europe the world knew before the Ukraine war is gone. Now, from class warfare to energy rationing, the post-war Europe that’s forming is on fire.

Abishur Prakash is a co-founder and geopolitical futurist at the Center for Innovating the Future (CIF), an advisory firm based in Toronto, Canada