Before we introduce the European strategies we ought to speak for the use of plural, not of course in the context of the word strategy, within this scope there is nothing peculiar, but more in the identification of the European. If we limit ourselves within the space of the European Union, the mere addition of the word Union, would justify the title without the need of any further explanation. However it is not about such a case. If we limit ourselves to the mere geography, then the wars and battles that take place to outside this context have to be justified. However, this does not occur. Otherwise we would integrate ourselves exclusively in the historical context, then we would risk getting easily trapped in the anachronistic. In fact, our context is that of the European variety. It is therefore distinctive and multiple at the same time, something which allows us to study the European-ness in a human and diachronic model as a subset of the epitome of Humanity and Time. In this manner, if we can make a composition of the different analyses and to address the entirety as a strategic mix which utilizes the different strategies within the same target. The European strategies have now a clear definition. With regards to the instrument which we are going to rely on is topostrategy, so that it fills in the gaps of the geostrategy, while we address in a diachronic manner this abstract entity which constitutes the European variety. Topostrategy has been defined in a previous notice, consequently we will define only the emphasis of the relations with regards to geometry. In this manner we address European strategies in an inherent manner. This approach explains also that it is this entity which crosses through with regards to civilizations but away from the social and local anxieties. It seems normal, in this instant, to name with greater accuracy the orbits within this context, in the concept of high level strategy, since it is capable by its definition and structure, not only to include strategies, but also, and this is even more important, because it concerns a more nonuniform reasoning, its capability of going opposite to the latter and this, even when these disappear within it. This approach of the entire problem is even more comprehensive, when we have in mind the mental scheme of Grothendieck, namely the sequential generalizations of entities in order to identify capable structures to endure without prior degeneration. Also through topostrategy we include the total, having the general formalistic instrument which provides the general information which would be inaccessible without this approach because the local even the multiple or the infinite cannot produce the equivalent. It is now possible to place more players within this space, in order for their strategic behavior to become manifested within the formalism of game theory according to the concept which was developed by Nash. This way we do not concern ourselves with the concept of cooperation since there is a complete context which surpasses the difference of cooperation-opposition in non zero sum games.