Who we find holds the Orthodox faith as we hold it. This is no doubt what the EO would also say. Because this is the only position that is right to hold, it probably will not be the Catholics. But either way, we are not clamoring for union with either of you. I really wish there was a way to make this position understandable without causing offense (or resulting in a “my agreed statements; let me show you them” moment from many people here), but on the other hand…the fact that it is essentially the same as the EO position (though of course they would have us confess the dyophysitism that they hold via the Tome of Leo, which I honestly cannot imagine ever happening; Christ will return before that happens…and then once He’s here we won’t have to!) shows that there is more hope to be placed in EO-OO reunion than others. While we do not have exactly the same ecclesiology, we view ecclesiology and related matters in similar ways, so leaders of both communions can be assured that their interlocutors of the other communion are serious and committed to true union.
This might, ironically, make things more difficult for us, as we are less open to even the idea of compromise, but it does mean that we are generally more likely to see each other as substantially Orthodox on an individual level, which may one day (by the grace of God) result in union.
The RC communion has a lot more to repudiate to even be considered, I’m sorry to say. In some ways, the EO-OO divide is a mirror image of the EO-RC divide: The EO say that we do not accept all that is necessary to be rightly called Orthodox, just as the RC say that the EO do not accept all that is necessary to be considered as conforming completely to the true faith. In a (polemical) way, the EO are our RC.
(braces for gnashing of teeth and such from all sides)