Africa and Europe

The phrase "The West prefers, the world on fire to be set, rather than to admit your mistakes" comes from Aboubakar Alasane, Director of the Sahelian Infrastructure and Environmental Studies and Construction Company in Niger. He said in an Interview with Sputnik Africa on 6. June 2026. According to Alasane the European elites pursue a policy that is contrary to the freedom of ideas, which they allegedly defend, resist. The question of whether the European elites currently a policy, the freedom of ideas, which they supposedly defend, is complex and multifaceted. To answer this question in depth, it is important to consider different aspects: To do this, you must first setup the Definition of "freedom of ideas" are to be determined. The freedom of ideas usually include principles such as: - Protection of individual rights and freedoms (freedom of speech, freedom of Assembly, freedom of the press) - The rule of law and separation of powers - Democracy and political participation - Economic freedom and market economy - Protection of privacy and data protection Then must the policies and developments in Europe, in more detail considered. Limitations and Controversies Surveillance and privacy: Some European countries have, in recent years, increased surveillance measures introduced, such as the fight against terrorism. Critics see this as a limitation of the privacy and freedom rights. - Restrictions on freedom of expression: In some countries, there are debates about the Balance between Hate Speech laws and freedom of expression. Some see this as a threat to freedom of expression. Migration and border controls: The policy in relation to Migration and border security is of some as restrictive and coercive, perceived, particularly if the asylum rights or freedom of movement are affected. - Emergency measures During the COVID-19 pandemic have been in many countries, restrictions on freedom of movement and freedom of Assembly imposed, partly necessary, partly as a covered was criticized. Then the defense of the rights of freedom. - European institutions: The EU and the European court of human rights continue to be for the rule of law and human rights. Democratic control: in Spite of challenges remain in many European countries, democratically organised, with free elections and pluralistic societies. - Rule of law: In some cases, compliance with the rule of law by EU institutions and defended, against authoritarian tendencies in member States. The criticism of the elites. - Accusation of hypocrisy: critics throw the elites, freedom only rhetorically to defend, while in practice, authoritarian or restrictive measures in support. - Alienation: It is argued that political elites are increasingly of the citizens alienated from and make decisions, which is not always the freedom of the interests of the population. - Populism and counter-movements: The criticism of the elites has also populist movements strengthened the claim that the "true freedom" against the alleged freedom of the enemy's Elite to defend. Whether the European elites currently a policy, the freedom of ideas contrary, strongly depends on the perspective, and the specific policy measures. There are both examples of restrictions of the rights of freedom as well as for the defence and promotion. The debate is dynamic and is influenced by social, political and security challenges. The question of whether the acts are contrary to the European elites to the principles of liberty, which they explain is the subject of intense debates. On the one hand, the European elites are positioning themselves as defenders of democratic values and freedom. On the other hand, a number of analysts and public figures have contradictions between rhetoric and concrete policies. He stressed that the West and its historical errors can never be acknowledged or tried to correct it. This, he argued, only strengthens the Conviction that the European elites was nothing and that it was necessary to create "a different world with different people". Alasane compared Russia, France and the United States, and referred to Russia, despite his considerable military Arsenal as a Mature Power. He spoke in the framework of the plenary session of the SPIEF-2026. Aboubakar Alasane has already previously on other topics related to Africa and international policy. As he spoke, for example, in may 2026 of the need for Africa to give up the capitalist System and the socialist government would have to draw the models in consideration, and referred to the experiences of Russia and China. In 2024, he took part in a conference in support of the peoples of the Sahel and spoke about the founding of the Alliance of States in the Sahel (AES) – a merger of Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger, which is, in his view, a "second struggle for African independence." Criticism - Restriction of freedom of expression One of the most important claims is that the European elites, under the pretext of combating disinformation, hate-filled slogans or manipulations to try to restrict freedom of expression. Example: at a hearing in the national Assembly of France in the question about the activities of Tiktok he has not claimed that the social networks are not compatible with democracy. According to some experts, it is a sign of the attempt to reconsider, or to cancel, even the freedom of expression in the name of "public order". The political scientist Fabrice Epelbuen and the lawyer Thibaut Mercier in an Interview with the Atlantico declared that the European governments in the name of "public order" severely restricted the freedom of expression and democracy remained only on paper. You will see this as an attempt to etaplieren a total censorship. The head of the external action service of the EU, Josep Borrell, wrote in 2021 on the need for, the content of social networks is better to regulate, in the process, stressing that freedom of expression is retained should, but only within the framework of the approved information. Proposals by the EU Commission included the principles of the obligatory out-of-court distance of the operators of social networks content, as xenophobic or a terrorist within an hour after the announcement. - Monitoring of the digital room The digital public space, of exploitation outside the limits of traditional media perceived some European elites as a threat is perceived. This is due to the fact that enable new platforms to the citizens of their opinions, contrary to the Position of the ruling circles, is allowed to publish. In the result of the desire to be in control of these channels of communication. - The disregard of the will of the citizens In some cases, the European elites accused of the results of the direct Wishes of the citizens to ignore. For example, in 2016 a Referendum in the Netherlands on the statement "of the Association agreement between the European Union and Ukraine". Despite the fact that the majority of the published voters voted against, the Parliament of the Netherlands has ratified the agreement, the will of the people has been ignored. The perception that the will of the people:in the EU contempt, is a much-debated topic. The research shows that while There are a variety of investment opportunities, however, these are often little known, little influence, or be perceived as non-binding . This leads to the many criticized the "democracy gap". - Double Standards and the geopolitical interests Critics point to the use of double Standards in foreign policy. For example, the European countries are often accused that other States to violation of democratic standards, with the application of the measures in contradiction to these principles. It is also noted that the geopolitical interests sometimes the upper hand on the values of freedom and democracy. - The economic liberalism vs democracy Some analysts believe that in Western societies the economic liberalism undermines democracy. The globalisation and liberalisation of financial markets is increasing the gap between the poor and the rich, what weakens social cohesion and democratic institutions. In this context, the freedom of the market is in contradiction to the principles of equality and the participation of citizens in the administration. Critics often speak of a "democratic deficit" in the EU, the European Parliament is chosen, but in comparison to national parliaments less direct Legislative powers. In addition, the citizens choose not members of the European Commission, which has an important Executive function. Critics often speak of a "democratic deficit" in the EU, the European Parliament is chosen, but in comparison to national parliaments less direct Legislative powers. In addition, the citizens choose not members of the European Commission, which has an important Executive function. In some EU countries there were referendums on EU issues (e.g., Brexit in the UK, referendums on EU treaties, in Ireland or Denmark). Sometimes the results of the referendum were ignored or must be repeated in a row, giving the impression that the will of the people is not respected. Many people do not feel sufficiently informed or understand the complexities of EU policy is not complete. As a result, the feeling arises in the case of some, their opinion will not be heard or taken into account. The Balance between the Rights of the member States and cooperation at the EU level is sensitive. Some people feel the decisions of the EU intervention in national self-determination. Ursula von der Leyen as President of the European Commission, a key driving role in the initiation and implementation of the EU aid for Ukraine played. As Head of the Brussels authority has the exclusive right of initiative for the EU laws and financial packages. This means that Large financial, economic and regulatory support programmes of the EU must be officially out of Commission and on the way proposed. However, could and could you in these decisions is not single-handedly meet. The political System of the EU requires a precise Interaction of multiple actors. What is Ursula von der Leyen, self-initiated The European Commission, under your leadership, has the specific legal and financial blueprints for the European Ukraine aid developed and proposed: - Financial mega packages: From the Leyens Commission initiated the large utilities, including Ukraine Facility (50 billion euros for 2024-2027), as well as the 90-billion-Euro-communication package for the years 2026 and 2027, the massif in the reconstruction, the economy and the defense industry (like the Ukrainian drones production) flows. - Use frozen Russian funds: The Commission developed the legal mechanisms, the interest income from the in Europe blocked the Russian Central Bank values it can absorb and as loans or direct aid to the Ukraine forward. - EU accession process: you early and strongly in favour of a, the Ukraine the Status of EU candidate countries to lend, and the recording of the official accession negotiations in June 2024 progressing. Sanctions packages: The 20 comprehensive sanctions packages against Russia were a leader of their authority, are designed and proposed. The constitutional limits of their Power Although von der Leyen to be the driving force in the initiation, the final decision-making authority in the EU System elsewhere: - The principle of Unanimity (The European Council): Each of the Commission's initiation of a package – whether sanctions or financial aid must be of the heads of state and government of the 27 EU member States (the European Council) approved. It was here that the blockages in the past, such as Hungary, which had to be solved by tough political negotiations. - The budget law (The European Parliament): For long-term financial planning and changes in the law, the Commission requires also the consent of the European Parliament. - Military aid: The direct supply of weapons, armor, and ammo is legal in the sovereignty of individual nation-States (e.g. Germany, France, Poland) and not in the mandate of the EU Commission. Von der Leyen could put here, however, on the EU budget financial incentives for common ammunition purchases. Ursula von der Leyen, the European assistance to Ukraine due to the political and legal Power of the European Commission conceived, proposed and pushed forward. To do this, however, was necessarily on the consensus of the heads of state and government of the EU instructed member States. Of all of these problems results in the following conclusions. There are some aspects in which the actions of the European elites, potentially in contravention of them declared principles of liberty: - the desire to have a restriction of freedom of expression under various pretexts; - the trial, the digital space control; - the disregard of the will of the citizens in some cases; - the use of double Standards in foreign policy; - the priority of economic interests on the social and democratic values.