By Vestnik Kavkaza
The Eurasian Economic Union will be created in only a year, and as we approach January 1, 2015, there are more and more accusations to Russia from the West of neo-imperial aspirations.
It is fair to say that some Russian officials and experts sometimes also use the rhetoric of the Cold War. For instance, Roman Shkolin, Chairman of the Eurasian Discussion Club, is sure that the progress of the idea of the Eurasian Union is interfered by “the activation of the anti-Russian policy of the EU and the United States, aimed at disrupting the process of reintegration in Eurasia. It is worth recalling that the U.S. administration's foreign policy objectives, enshrined in the National Security Concept, clearly indicate the need to prevent the integration processes in Eurasia and to maintain in Eurasia geopolitical pluralism. That is, Russia should not be strong”.
One of the key elements in countering Russian policies, according to Shkolin, has become different virtual integration initiatives of the EU to create new barriers between the two brotherly peoples. “First of all, the Eastern Partnership appeared, but then, when it became clear that it is not so effective, the so-called association agreement with the EU was created. Such agreements were to form an impression that this is the path to EU membership. However, such agreements are signed with a number of countries that are not part of Europe, for example, with the countries of Africa, and of course, they will never become full EU members. Nevertheless, the pro-Western elite of the post-Soviet republics gladly seized upon the myth of European choice in order to disorient their own peoples and clearly explain to them why they should not join the Eurasian Union. The first trap of the European choice almost hit Ukraine. Tye complementary policy of Armenia has exhausted itself. We must pay tribute to the Armenian President - he has made the right choice that meets the fundamental interests of the Armenian people. Armenia's European integration has been stopped”, he thinks.
Alexei Pushkov, Chairman of the State Duma Committee for International Affairs, is less severe in his assessments. Readiness of Kyrgyzstan to consider the question on joining the Customs Union is an important moment for forming the CU, according to him. Pushkov said that “in Kyrgyzstan, the American military base in Manas is going to be shut down. I think it should be done long ago. We used to be told that this is a timely decision for Americans to get several bases in Central Asian countries to conduct war in Afghanistan against bin-Laden. But bin-Laden doesn’t exist anymore. We don’t hear about bin-Laden anything. Therefore, the war in Afghanistan has nothing in common with the reasons which led to the war. And I think American withdrawal from military bases in the region will play a positive role only”.
Estimating the U. S. policy in the CIS, Pushkov said: “The USA has never played a role in the region such as they played in the Middle East, where they have a stable system of allies and it still remains – with Egypt, with Saudi Arabia, with Israel, and some other countries. American presence is significant in the Middle East region. The CIS is the zone where the United States always tried to penetrate, but I think they chose a wrong way. The way of the orange revolution. Self-discredit of American policy in the region took place. Why did the new Maidan fail in Ukraine? Because everybody saw results of Maidan in 2004-2005. Yushchenko came to office with 52% of support and left with 2%. This is the orange result… The "orange project" stopped being attractive for the majority of Ukrainians. They know what it is. They got an injection, except for a minority which is very serious and active, but still it is minority which holds protests on the Maidan. So I think the strategy of "orange revolutions", which the USA implemented successfully in some countries, produced the opposite results in the CIS.
According to Pushkov, even in Georgia the "orange revolution" of 2003, which led Saakashvili to power, was disavowed by the current Georgian majority, i.e. it was admitted that it was at least a difficult and ambiguous period in the history of Georgia. Many people think that it was a negative period in the history of Georgia. Thus, America’s reliance on "orange revolutions" in the CIS countries didn’t pay off and led to opposite results”.
Meanwhile, Pushkov sees “certain improvement of relations with Georgia. Russia took a very reasonable position after the change of power in Georgia and new trends which are outlined in the policy of the current Georgian leadership. Today we even discuss a possibility of returning to the visa free regime between Russia and Georgia. I think it is a positive development. We have contacts with the Georgian delegation in the Parliamentary Assembly in the Council of Europe. They are not intensive, but in comparison with the situation of the Cold War, I could see relevant warming of the climate”.
