In its geographical definition, Eastern Europe extends from Europe until the Urals, in Russia. To prove that, I have no doubt of the sense of Europeans the Russian people have. We have only to look at the incredibly rich Russian literature, namely Dostoievsky, to realize the self-perception that people has as the forefront guard of the European continent. That also applies to the populations of Russian ethnicity that inhabit the Asian part of the country, whether it is deeply in Siberia, in Irkutsk for example, or in its eastern most point, in Vladivostok, which in fact literally means “domain of the easterners”.

Out of curiosity, although it tells a great deal of Russia’s europeism, lies at the characteristic architecture of Russia churches, especially in its bulb-shaped domes, that appeared from the XVI century onward. That was when the Russians started defeating the Muslim peoples. Those domes reckon the turbants of those communities and symbolize Russian supremacy over them.

However, there is a problem of self-perception in this debate that cannot be ignored, one that is related with the fact of not being polite to use the expression “Eastern Europe” or “Oriental Europe” randomly, although it is commonly used to refer to the countries that once were beyond the Iron Curtain (with due exception to Tito’s Yugoslavia). In fact, “East” has profoundly negative connotation to most of those people, because it backs them away from that is Europe per se, a cultural and civilizational space, thus tying them to a past they would rather forget or pretend that never existed. Not surprisingly, they prefer to be inserted in Central Europe. I am talking about the Czech Republic (if we look at the map, it is in fact in the middle of Europe, a space that goes from the Atlantic until the Urals), Poland, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia (Eastern there is meant as backward). They leave that category of Eastern to others, such as Russia.
To me, Central and Eastern Europe include perhaps a more cultural and religious space (the Pope’s arguments are not foolish at all) while referring only to those countries that belonged to the former Warsaw Pact and former Yugoslavia. I would only exclude countries like Turkey, or even the Armenians and Georgians, that are Christians, and other former soviet republics (with due exception to the Baltic countries of course).

It is in fact an heterogeneous space. Ethnically, it includes Slavs (Czechs, Poles, Slovaks, Slovenians, Russians, Ukrainians, Serbs, Croats, Bosnians, …), the Romanians (that are a mixture of Latinos and Slavs), the Hungarians, that belong to a different group, as the Finnish, Latvians and Estonians.

But I think that the nation-State is a myth. Even in what we call Western Europe there are too few states that match that notion: Portugal and few others. And I am not talking about those issues that have risen with immigration; I am talking about historical minorities that inhabit those places for a long time. France has problems with the Corsos, Bretons, Alsatians and Lorrainians (that speak German), Basques. Italy has German, French, Slovenian and Albanese speaking minorities. Spain has the Basques, Catalans, Galicians. Germany has a Frisian minority (that extends to the Netherlands to the South of Denmark) and a Czech one (the Sorben). And so forth…

In Central and Eastern Europe there are many interesting situations. Poland and Czechoslovakia have expelled their German populations after World War II (6 and 3 millions, respectively), so they have few problems… Although there is a Polish minority in the Ukraine. The biggest problem, one that has gotten in the relation between the neighbours, concerns Hungary, that has Slovakian, Romanian and Serb minorities, as half its territory was taken away at the end of World War I after Trianon (France), as it came out defeat for its alliance with the Central Powers. The Hungarians have conceded to those minorities full citizenship privileges. In fact, many families were separated because of those treaties signed in Versailles.

The Ukraine has around 100 ethnic minorities. The independence that a handful of these countries gained after the First World War has left minorities scattered everywhere, as they were related with the Austria-Hungarian Empire’s multinational trait, from which theses States were once a part of. Only Czechoslovakia had a true democracy and there were only few problems. Until Nazi Germany’s occupation in 1938…

It is interesting to realize that even today there are German speaking minorities in Hungary and Romania, as a result of the migration movements that started in the XIV century. Even more interesting is to check the word the Slavs arranged for “German”, one that has to do with the fact of such minorities having never learnt the language of the territories where they settled in: “Nemci”, which literally means “dumb”.

The integration of these countries in the European Union had to face firstly the economic difficulties and their problematic adaption to a “capitalist” model. In order for that to happen, the Union invested a large sum of money, even before their adhesion. At the beginning, the CEEC (Central and Eastern European Countries) looked at the EU with great enthusiasm, as it symbolized a return to Europe and a guarantee for their independence against the Russians. But, as more time and economic, social and political reforms were demanded in order to fulfil the indispensable criteria to join in, the expectations were transformed into scepticism and resentment. They were not sovereign before the fall of the Berlin Wall and they rapidly realized that they would not be so in the EU. Afterwards, some, like Poland, were seen as “agents” connected to the United States and called as “Trojan Horses” by the Germans.

We have to bear in mind that joining NATO happened before they joined the EU, as it more quickly answered their expectations, namely in assuring their safeguard against the former Slav brother, Russia. We also have to consider that it was due to the United States support that they became independent after World War I. We only have to remember the 14 Points of Wilson… In the other hand, exiting the Soviet bloc represented an entrance in the German sphere of influence, that promptly backed the CEEC’s adhesion in the EU for obvious economic interests, ones that they do not appreciate: a déjà-vu feeling, for the deep hatred they continue to feel toward the “Nemci”.

The CEEC clearly have a feeling of being “left overs” of History, that they are always the first ones to suffer when things go wrong. We only have to look at the Czech’s resentment that even before being the Britons and French sold them to the Germans in 1948, in Munich, and especially after integrating the Soviet orbit, had life standards comparable to those of Switzerland or Sweden. And if there is one thing that they CEEC know quite well is their History…

In the other hand, the EU has been favouring resentment over the minorities. One of the adherence criteria concerned the respect for the minorities in those countries, thus forcing them to grant them rights (namely cultural and political ones) as they appeared after the fall of the Soviet bloc. And those demands are not popular at all, in countries that were sovereign for a very limited period in time… It is a fact that most of those minorities use the EU to demand more and more from the governments of the countries where they live. Still, we also have the case of Russian minorities in the Baltics that continue to have reasons to complain about the treatment they’re being subject of, without having the EU to care much about it…

As I said, it is natural that a great power like Russia has its zone of influence, which, in a Machiavellian International Relations perspective, is more than natural and even expected to be so. In this sense, I do not understand the indignation of those who warn against Russia. Moreover, there is the issue of Russian minorities in many countries: Baltic republics, Ukraine, Moldova...

In that region, there is a country that traditionally has had a closer relationship with Russia: Slovakia, apart from Belarus, because both depend heavily on energy issues. This is the key point. Russia knows that the CEECs depend on her in terms of energy and hence the use of this weapon in bilateral relations. Quite recently, in July, a Balkan summit on the issue was held, which included Italy. In this context, Turkey plays a key role because it can provide an alternative route for energy supplies.

The "Balkans’ bee-nest", as someone called it, remains a key area because it shows the divisions of the Western powers. The independences in the former Yugoslavia are evidence of that, dividing the EU and demonstrating that this is far from being a genuine "unity" but is a forum where the states are going to reach agreements on purely economic issues. Not only that, it had to be the U.S. intervening in the region. Germany, Austria and the Vatican immediately supported the secession of Slovenia and Croatia, anticipating the common position of the Union. Again, France has always been the traditional ally of Serbia. Moreover, Russia and Greece clearly support Serbia (the Orthodox religion plays an essential role here). Spain has attached itself with these two against the independence of Kosovo.

Moreover, this region is a mixture of ethnic groups, reflecting the clash of two great empires, the Ottoman and Austro-Hungarian. The only state left from the former Yugoslavia without this problem is Slovenia, which has minorities in Austria and Italy. Even small entities such as Kosovo have many minorities, among Serbs, Turks, Gorani, etc. Tito managed to maintain a united Yugoslavia, even facing Stalin, contributing to a sense of pride by the “Yugoslav exception”, but the emergence of ambitious leaders and economic divisions of the country have determined the final result. Croatia, Bosnia and Macedonia moved to the American orbit and are totally western protectorates, including the last two, which depend on the presence of international forces to remain stable. Serbia feels, not without reason, totally humiliated, even Vojislav Kostunica said that they had put the country asking on its knees. Not surprisingly, the nationalist sentiments remain alive and well... But we should not that there still exists amongst many gruops, including academics, a sense of "domination-nostalgia " - those who think that “South Slavia” still makes sense (a literal translation of Yugoslavia), because there is no shortage of people with mixed origins.

Then there is another country stripped by history, Bulgaria, whose territory was also scattered at the end of World War I. And as I said, they all know their history. And they do not forget it.

If Kosovo becomes independent, it will be a time bomb. It must be, like other countries of the former Yugoslavia, a Western protectorate, without any timeline. There are resentments that last for centuries and that at the slightest opportunity, they arise. It would be essential if they would integrate into the European Union, to achieve a minimum stability.

Whether you want it or not, Russia will always be a privileged interlocutor with Putin or not, so we'll see, without forgetting the fundamental role of Turkey, who were promised the membership and continues to be on hold, generating expectations in its population and ones that are being defrauded.