Ahead of the presidential elections in Russia experts discuss one of the main directions of Vladimir Putin’s program – the Eurasian project. The editor-in-chief of Vestnik Kavkaza, Alexei Vlasov, and the head of the Caspian Cooperation Institute, Sergey Mikheev tried to understand whether the idea of the Eurasian union is only an election step or it will have further development.
The editor-in-chief of Vestnik Kavkaza, Alexei Vlasov
On the one hand, Eurasian theme became one of new directions of power. Today we have several articles by Vladimir Putin, but the first one touched on the theme of Eurasianship. Revival of the Eurasian project, proposed by Nursultan Nazarbayev many years ago, has certain pre-election reasons. Thus, experts are concerned with the fact that it is only an election theme, which will be forgotten in the context of internal political problems of Russia after the elections would be held.
On the other hand, many people consider the Eurasian project as construction of a new policy of Russia in the CIS. For many years this theme lay in the sphere of energy interests and opposition to non-regional players, which try to limit influence of Russia in the region. Thus, revival of the Eurasian project was considered as an attempt to revive the empire or the Soviet Union. However, Russia has no desire or opportunity for revival of the empire. But it has an opportunity for extension of competitive advantages through effective cooperation with the main partners in the former Soviet space – Kazakhstan and Belarus. The ideology of the project is an analogue of the European Union, in which Germany and France play dominant role. At the moment, only economic integration is implied, but in Russia and Kazakhstan some politicians began to discuss establishing of Eurasian parties, assemblies and so on.
When the Eurasian project is discussed in Russia and Kazakhstan, the format “not” is used: it is “not the USSR,” it is “not the empire,” it is “not limitation of sovereignty of Kazakhstan and Belarus.” We discuss what we do not want. But what do we want? What will be the Eurasian project in two years? As for extension of the project, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan could join it, and the period of adaptation might be very difficult for them. In Russia attention is focused on macroeconomic indexes, while real public support of the Eurasian projects will depend on reaction of minor and medium businesses.
In articles of Vladimir Putin, Nursultan Nazarbayev and Alexander Lukashenko basis for discussion was laid, but a clear structure of the Eurasian project hasn’t been defined yet. At first the expert society should define the perfect image of the Eurasian Union, instruments of implementation of the project, despite the political situation.
Head of the Caspian Cooperation Institute, Sergey Mikheev
Appearance of such project shouldn’t be considered as pre-election or economic only. There is a global fight for surviving. In next century countries have three ways of development: to be a subsidiary of a global center of development; to try to be one of these centers; to become a marginal unimportant unity. In this context in the Eurasian space some former Soviet republics have a chance to become a center of development, first of all, a technologic, economic and geopolitical center. Russia, Kazakhstan, Belarus and Ukraine might form such center. It has a strategic point. Such ideas existed before Putin, and they will exist after him.
As for the economic aspect, there is the successful Customs Union. The Common Economic Space has a reasonable ground and should be developed. The political aspect is not written in any document. The Eurasian Union could exist for 50 and more years, longer than Vladimir Putin. Of course, this or that article could have election character, but this fact doesn’t discredit the idea itself. Consolidation of territories in the Eurasian space is not accidental. There are objective historic reasons for it, long-term tendencies in the world, including economic and geostrategic ones.
As for values and milestones, it appears that if they do not correlate with values of West Europe, they are wrong. At the moment the political aspect of the idea is not great, it is the theme for discussion of political scientists. The main aim is surviving in the current world, which certainly will be multipolar.
