MOSCOW. (RIA Novosti political commentator Pyotr Romanov) - The European Union is a very convenient instrument for studying the role of personality in history.
Of course, all EU members decide on the Union's general strategic line collectively but still much depends on the personalities of European leaders - both those who replace each other at the rotating EU wheel and those who rule individual EU countries.
Finally, there is a separate but important group of countries with which the EU cooperates or jointly resolves urgent global problems. Every personality either complicates life for the EU or makes it easier.
Let me quote several examples to illustrate my point. If Nicolas Sarkozy wins the next elections in France, which is quite possible, his victory will prevent Turkey's EU entry. It is one of his election slogans.
Or take another example. What will happen in the wake of the recent victory in Serbia of the Nationalist Party led by Vojislav Seselj, a defendant at the Hague tribunal? How much will it impede Serbia's admission to the EU, which Serbian leaders of some other political forces also wish to prevent?
Or, what effect will the inevitable and near departure from the political scene of Washington's loyal ally Tony Blair have on the Union's domestic affairs and its relations with the U.S.? What if the EU gains from it?
The EU cannot be indifferent to the successors of George Bush in the United States and Putin in Russia. In both cases, the changes are not far off.
The EU is at variance with Bush on a number of foreign policy issues, like Iraq and Iran. They also disagree on some fundamental moral problems which are vital for the understanding of democracy, like the attitude to capital punishment, torture and illegal prisons.
Putin, on the other hand, has contributed to the Union's successful cooperation with Moscow - the partners are consistently overcoming the Cold War vestiges and resolving new problems, the most important of which concerns energy. The recent blitz visit of the EU President Angela Markel to Sochi bears this out. There were problems, nobody tried to conceal them, but both parties tried to resolve them with a smile and enthusiasm, which was clear even to passive onlookers.
I think this was so not only because of their mutual interest in developing strategic cooperation, but also because of Putin's fluent German and Merkel's energy. She has been much more active than her EU predecessors in tackling such a complicated subject as the EU Constitution. She was first to suggest that her successors at the EU wheel should take an active part in resolving this issue. This logical approach preserves the continuity of efforts, makes them more effective and likely to succeed.
Regrettably, there are other examples as well. Take, for instance, the rule of the Polish twins Jaroslaw and Lech Kaczynski, the president and prime minister, who vetoed the Russia-EU talks on the new agreement. They responded to Moscow's ban on exports of Polish beef with inedible additions of Indian buffalo meat. In other words, Poland was engaged in crude falsification.
But instead of admitting its responsibility and promptly redressing the situation, Poland staged a big row, impeded the Union's cooperation with Russia and compelled its leaders to resolve this unpleasant problem. This is why Putin and Merkel had to discuss Polish meat.
Head of the Federal Service for Veterinary and Phytosanitary Oversight Sergei Dankvert and EU Deputy Agriculture Commissioner Paola Testori Coggi have just signed in Berlin a memo on EU livestock exports to Russia. Now there is a way out of the crisis.
Incidentally, the Polish-supplied meat had a EU sanitary certificate, which discredited not only Poland but also the EU as a whole. This is why representatives of countries with objectionable meat exports were invited to Berlin -Secretary of State at the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development Marek Zagorski and spokesmen for Romania and Bulgaria, with who Moscow has the same trouble.
As a result, the sides signed a document, whereby the Poles virtually admitted their guilt by agreeing to let Russian sanitary inspectors check their meat produce.
This suggests a natural question: what was the point of staging a row and vetoing Russia-EU continued rapprochement?
It is clear that Poland has lost from this row, and the only explanation is the personal antipathy of the twin leaders to Russia unless they are very indiscriminate in food and sincerely thought that buffalo meat tasted good.
The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and may not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.
