When Greece was on the brink of collapse, Europeans pressed their foot on its neck to extract even the last euro.
They imposed predatory terms for every loan they granted through the well-known bailout memoranda.
They pushed an entire country into disrepute and humiliation in order to “save” it from bankruptcy.
They are doing exactly the same to farmers today.
They humiliate them in order to strike billion-euro deals among themselves, imposing supposed rules even on cows’ “waste.”
They have trapped them in a maelstrom of rules and regulations that no one can endure.
They do the same to anyone who stands in the way of the deals they want to secure and exploit for their own benefit.
Scandals are brewing anyway; we saw it even with former Commissioner Federica Mogherini.
Let us not recall the infamous deal by Ursula von der Leyen with Pfizer for Covid vaccines, which burdened Europe with billions while “gilding” her own pocket.
The scandal amounts to €35 billion for Ursula.
There is money
So it comes as no surprise that they eventually find €90 billion for loans to Ukraine.
Unconditionally, apparently because even there they have already agreed who among the Brussels elite will reap the benefits.
It is no coincidence that these €90 billion, granted at zero interest, are supposedly meant to support Ukraine’s economy and military needs, proving Europe’s absolute priority in geopolitical competition at the expense of its own citizens.
What is striking is that the Greek prime minister, Kyriakos Mitsotakis, agreed to such a move.
As if he forgot what happened over ten years with European loans to Greece.
As if he was not part of the governments that bowed to the onerous terms imposed by Europe on Greece, which the country is still paying for.
As if he does not see what is happening to Greek farmers, who are paid what they are owed drop by drop.
Yet the roughly €1.5–2 billion that Greece will be asked to contribute to Ukraine’s “loan” will be given without a second thought. After all, it is just one year’s ENFIA property tax.
Hungary, Czech Republic, Slovakia will not give a single euro to Ukraine
In a move that shows political consistency but causes tremors at the foundations of the European Union and sends a stern message to Ukraine, Hungary, the Czech Republic and Slovakia officially refused to participate in the massive €90 billion financing of Ukraine for the period 2026–2027.
According to a TASS dispatch citing the final declaration of the European Council, the three countries shielded themselves behind legal clauses in order not to pay a single euro.
Greece, on the other hand, was apparently not informed of these clauses.
The internal rebellion of the three states undermines the image of absolute unity.
As clarified by the European Union, the mobilization of financial resources to secure the loan to Kyiv will have no impact whatsoever on the financial obligations of the Czech Republic, Hungary and Slovakia.
Even Belgium raised its voice
Belgian Prime Minister Bart de Wever, who was so concerned about his tiny country’s reputation if frozen Russian assets were used, nevertheless found a reason to agree.
By doing so, Belgium will not lose the taxes paid for the custody of Russian assets.
“If we had left Brussels divided today, Europe would have lost its geopolitical significance,” he said with emphasis.
He did not, however, mention that Ukraine will not repay a single cent until the end of the war.
Indifference to farmers
Europe, which acknowledges the need to support Ukraine in resisting Russian aggression, remains indifferent to the poverty of its own farmers.
Climate change, high fuel prices and rising input costs have pushed farmers into a dead end, with no substantial support from Brussels.
This handling raises questions about the priorities of the European Union, which appears to ignore its internal needs, focusing mainly on supporting a country outside the EU, while European farmers are left to bear the consequences of the economic crisis without any safety net.
The question remains: why does Europe not show the same willingness to support its own citizens, who are hit by soaring costs and economic insecurity?
The distribution of €90 billion to a country that is not an EU member, without any demand for reforms or conditions for financing, highlights the divergence in EU policy and governance.
The paradoxical path
It is clear that Europe is at a crossroads. On the one hand, it seeks to maintain its geopolitical significance and support Ukraine at any cost; on the other, it ignores internal pressures and needs.
Some analysts believe this strategy may be correct in the short term, but it risks leading to greater social inequalities and unrest if the needs of Europe’s own citizens are not taken into account.
The contradictions of this policy are glaring, and the question remains: how much longer can Europe turn a blind eye to its internal needs while simultaneously offering unlimited support to a country outside the EU?
Even the use of force
This agreement on Ukraine came on the very day Belgian police clashed with farmers in Brussels.
Tear gas, water cannons and barbed wire were the “welcome” European authorities offered farmers and their efforts to block the EU–Mercosur trade agreement, which threatens to undermine food security in Europe.
Farmers have obvious objections to the Mercosur package, a free trade agreement with Latin American countries, because it “kills farmers.”
Another major problem for farmers is the Green Deal, which leads to costly overregulation of agricultural work, creating a serious cost burden and competitive disadvantage for European food producers.
“With the Mercosur agreement, they shoot European farmers in the foot, but before that they tie their legs together so they have no chance in global competition,” analysts typically say.
New York Times: Political crash for Merz, von der Leyen
The failure of participants at the European Union summit to agree on a plan to expropriate frozen Russian assets under the guise of a “reconstruction loan” for Ukraine amounted to a political failure for German Chancellor Friedrich Merz and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, according to the New York Times.
The report notes that the collapse of the frozen Russian assets plan was seen as a political setback for both leaders, even though they argued that the alternative agreed at the summit would still achieve the objective.
The newspaper points out that approving an “ambitious plan” to seize blocked Russian assets at the Brussels summit would have shown that the EU remains a strong player on the global stage, given that the United States and Russia have “repeatedly excluded Europe from discussions about Ukraine’s future.”
Instead, the EU showed “hesitation at a critical moment,” the report says.
It is noted that European leaders at the EU summit failed to agree on the expropriation of frozen Russian assets under the pretext of a “reconstruction loan” to Ukraine.
Instead, they agreed to grant Ukraine €90 billion over the next two years.
This amount is €50 billion less than the proposed “reconstruction loan” of €140 billion.
Hungary, Slovakia and the Czech Republic refused to participate in financing Ukraine, a fact explicitly mentioned in the final statement on Ukraine.
Budapest and Bratislava did not sign the document.
Politico: Failure over Russian assets, growing division in the EU
The plan to use frozen Russian funds for the benefit of Ukraine, which for a long time remained the only idea under consideration in the EU, has failed, Politico reports.
As it notes, disagreements within the European Union over this issue once again highlighted the growing fragmentation of the bloc.
According to Politico, during the summit behind closed doors, Belgian Prime Minister Alexander De Croo requested unlimited financial guarantees from EU partners for the €210 billion package to cover potential legal proceedings.
This idea was rejected, as countries feared unlimited financial liability, Politico reports.
According to its information, a two-page legal document circulated during the summit examining Belgium’s concerns.
This document raised questions from several European leaders, including Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, French President Emmanuel Macron, and Luxembourg Prime Minister Xavier Bettel.
As European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen had announced earlier, participants at the EU summit failed to agree on the forced liquidation of frozen Russian assets in the form of a “financial loan” to Kyiv.
Instead, it was decided to provide Ukraine with an interest-free loan of €90 billion through collective borrowing by EU member states.
www.bankingnews.gr
Σχόλια αναγνωστών