Even if it ends up as the victor in the war it began with the Ukraine, Russia will lose much more than it will have gained. It will have provided justification for those who in the rest of Europe, consider Russia to be Europe's eternal antagonist, and as a result, want to strenghten Western Europe's military potential (in which effort, they are being successful). Actually, a fundamental Russian interest always was to get the country fully accepted as an integral part of modern Europe and not as a threat.

In the West, there were people who had a vision for the future that was compatible with this interest of Russia. Statesmen like de Gaulle, who proposed a Europe that would stretch as far as the Urals; or Willy Brandt, with his Ost politik. For the others, who were in the majority, Russia always had to stay under the suspicion of being a threat. A Russian victory over the Ukraine will give them the full momentum required to continue stressing their perspective.

***

THE RYAN AIR METHOD

In one current method by which to do business, a product or service which has been customarily bought as a single item, and therefore for a single price, gets split into a number of different parts, each with its own set price. To buy the full item, as a product or as a service, you need to pay the sum of the price for each part. But you can also buy only some of the parts.

Who benefits most from this? The consumer when doing his/her purchases, or the seller? Is it true that with this method, there is a wider choice and prices become cheaper?

It's a system which is creeping into - or has been adopted by - a number of sectors, mostly services, such as in financial and banking business, the provision of electronic services, and travel. However, the major exponent of the method has been Ryan Air, and naming the whole approach after this company would be quite appropriate.

***

MALTA'S INSTITUTIONS

We all agree about the importance of the "institutions" in the administration of these islands and that to ensure good governance, institutions should be allowed to carry out their work according to the rules established by the constitution and their legal statutes. There can be no proper governance if the institutions face difficulties when carrying out their tasks independently and transparently, in line with the law.

Yet, in practice, we all seem to consider the institutions merely as a decisional tool that one can push in and out according to one's personal objectives or those of the corporation one represents. This happens both from outside the institutions - by people having the power to set them up and nominate their leaders; as well as from the inside - by their own members. Interference is carried out openly, through secret manipulations, informally, and at times, as something normal.

Malta's institutions remind one of a slab of Emmenthal cheese, which looks solid and compact from the outside, but is tunnelled on the inside. This might be the case because Maltese society is small and in it, everybody knows everybody. Or it might be happening because as a people, we do not really believe in clear-cut rules: we believe that what has to be done should be carried out between persons of trust, who according to circumstances and their convenience, are allowed to push one way or the other, without having to show any "great" consistency.