The excitement around the “Fuck the EU” derailing the US top diplomat Victoria Nuland is great. The EU could react. In its Ukrainian policy they must be taught by anyone.

Who has to do with U.S. politicians must get used to a rough language. Hillary Clinton, until recently chief diplomat as Secretary of State of America, the F-word used liberally.

And also the reigning European Secretary of State Victoria Nuland responded well to a demand of the “New York Times” for their “Fuck the EU” comment rather amused. Something belong but to the business, said Nuland. And she’s right: The F-word is as common as with us the word shit in stressed U.S. circles.

Europe is still outraged. Chancellor Angela Merkel on Friday made ​​its spokeswoman align, hold Nulands statement “absolutely unacceptable.” The question arises: Is the criticism of top American diplomat actually justified – against the background of a second live recording, in which the EU diplomat Helga Schmid apparently complains that Europeans would unfairly represented by Washington as too “soft” ?

The EU insisted on Tymoshenko’s release

The answer is an emphatic yes and no. What is wrong: In the power play with Russian President Vladimir Putin to win the favor of Ukraine – in fact the second largest territorial state in Europe – heckled the EU negotiators to the foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton mostly behind. Putin joined a cold smile between harassment against the Ukrainian government of President Viktor Yanukovych and carrot in the form of billions promise to Kiev.

The EU, however – and that is often forgotten, its Member States – long focused primarily on the release of the controversial Revolution leader Yulia Tymoshenko, Yanukovych simply did not want to grant. At the same time they renounced in the negotiations with Ukraine in the strongest possible incentive to the prospect of a possible EU membership. And they offered to the economically troubled country little immediate financial help.

Brussels forgot: Only those who submit to attractive offers, including receivables can provide, couple about the payment of aid funds to democratic reforms in Ukraine. Only gradually did the Europeans begin to realize this, so will now be rectified in the offering of Kiev – especially as the time is right, because Russia has suspended its own billion payments only once.

But would be tougher sanctions against the Ukrainian government is a better way, as Americans seem to demand? The effect of such measures is itself viewed in Washington as limited. And Europe must also take into account the importance of Ukraine for Russia is still as direct neighbor. There is circulating a wisdom: “Russia without Ukraine is a country Russia with Ukraine is an empire..”

A little humor can not hurt

President Putin may have given up hope to annex the Ukraine. But he wants to prevent in any case that the country is part of the EU – also from an elusive sense of encirclement out that makes him see the huge country as a buffer against Western aggression.

In this context too stormy diplomatic approach could enable the pro-Russian part of the deeply divided Ukraine into turmoil and even lead to civil war – which would frustrate the option that Yanukovych government democratically get rid of in the elections in 2015.

Therefore, the prudent course of Europeans is not so wrong. This has them none other than major U.S. strategist Zbigniew Brzezinski recently certified at the Munich Security Conference. Only a softer approach, a compromise that would lead to the goal in Ukraine, he said.

Europe should just laugh at the American F-word. A little humor can not hurt in transatlantic relations straight anyway.

[adrotate banner=”46″]