Bulgaria and Moldova, the new Euroscepticism comes from the East. Is the European Union at the end?

(To Giampiero Venturi)
15/11/16

After the earthquake Trump, two other micro-calamities were hit by the European Union: in Bulgaria the former General Radev won the presidential elections, in favor of a "return to the East" of Sofia; in Moldova, the presidential Dodon wins, a Eurosceptic advocate of a cooling of relations with Brussels.

Two cases related to timing and geography, but in reality related to very different realities.

Bulgaria, together with Romania, entered the Union in the 2007 with the penultimate enlargement. Although with a discreet Europeanist impulse, encouraged more than anything else by the fascination of the Brussels structural funds, the country has remained linked to its past, permeated by a showy Russian cultural halo. To understand this it is more useful to arrive in front of the basilica Alexsandr Nevskij on a snowy day in Sofia, than to resort to historical analysis. It's a question of leather, of impact. 

Within the Union it is the only country to use the Cyrillic alphabet and the only Slavic with an Orthodox majority. Not even the entry into NATO of the 2004, while filing the military political tie with Moscow, has managed to scrape the idea that Sofia is a city with Eastern traction. In other words, in the union euphoria of this foreshortening of the century, the deep furrows of cultural roots have not been forgotten and the heart of Bulgaria has continued to beat in the same direction.

Seen in this way, General Radev's victory over the ever less popular pro-European elites may also be there.

Things are apparently different for Moldova. Poverissima former Soviet republic, it is not part of the Union, but enjoys a trade agreement with Brussels that from 2014 put it on a plan of effective cooperation with the West. In the final shoot that has always seen her in the balance between a Romance matrix and an approach to Russia, in recent years she seemed oriented to a Europeanist vocation.

After all, unlike the Bulgarians, the Moldavians are of Romanian culture (the flags teach many things ...) and therefore of Latin origin. 50 years of direct Soviet domination and a fair Russian presence (10% of the population), especially in qualified social roles, have never canceled the Western vocation of Chisinau. The existence on the Dnestr of a rigid historical border did not prevent Moldavia from dreaming of an evolution and a definitive return in the "Europe of the rich": the shadow of Transnistria that rises east of the great river with all the legacy of Russian influence; it has not prevented an endemic poverty that makes it the worst place in Europe.

What happened then?

Very simple. The elections in Bulgaria and Moldova, although related to very different realities, converge on one point: the European Union is no longer the Bengodi coveted by everyone.

The food for thought at this point is crucial: as long as Euroscepticism came from rich and consolidated realities, everything could fit into the hysterical pattern of local discontent. We are talking about Sweden, Austria, Holland, Denmark… demographically smaller realities, but spokespersons for an already prosperous Europe no longer willing to pay for others.

The interesting fact is that the detachment from Brussels is now strongly supported by the poorest countries, which no longer seem to be attracted even by the sirens of European funds, fundamental for disastrous economies such as those of Romania and Bulgaria until 2007.

Let's take a numerical example: in the 2015 the European Union has invested in Bulgaria 2,8 billions of euros; Sofia, in the same year, contributed to the coffers of Brussels with only 400 million.

Why then do not Europe like it anymore?

Some analysts insist with embarrassing blindness in considering Europe under constant siege. Behind the electoral defaults that occur from one country to another there would be the shadow of the machinations of the bad on duty, ready to destabilize an oasis of freedom and wealth. Not even to say, the finger is pointed on Putin's Russia, considered deus ex machina of any hostile change in Brussels.

The reality is probably different. The new political and geopolitical balances that are emerging in Europe are the result of an endemic failure, which has little to do with external pressures. The socio-economic system inaugurated in the mid-year '90 and materialized with the single currency at the beginning of the millennium has in fact been involved. Member States that with different models and results guaranteed a harmonious development to their communities, were replaced with nothing. The European Union has not been able to put in place in the last 15 years an alternative political model to that of sovereign nations, leaving the guarantees suspended on fundamental lands such as work, housing, health, education, security.

How was this translated on a local level?

In the most virtuous countries, the perception of “giving more than one receives” has developed; in the poorest, the idea has taken hold that the certainties offered by consolidated social models no longer exist. To be honest: the Austrians are just as dissatisfied with this supranational model as the Greeks.

It is no coincidence that today's Italy in the polls seems more insecure about its future than it was 20 years ago. As for Italy, the perception becomes even more evident in countries accustomed to a state economy, where ended the excitement for an easy wealth, today the diktats of Brussels are received as annoyances, far from the guaranteed minimums and the needs of the communities locals.

Considering the now widespread Euroscepticism as the echo of selfish and hysterical populisms, at this point it is a test of dullness; a probable boomerang that will continue to affect what remains of the European institutions.

A Europe without historical, social and political identity has shown itself that it has no future. With it inexorably sets the horizon of a global society that neglects the little ones, the diversities, the communities. With it perhaps also the myth of globalism and of a society interconnected by force with a single imposed model cracks.

Bulgaria and Moldova join the list of those who do not like this model of Union; Brexit told us it can get out. It is likely that the new voices arriving from overseas will tell us what will be of the Old Continent. After all, this is precisely the greatest weakness.

(photo: websites)