By Vestnik Kavkaza
The statement announced during the Russian-Armenian summit on Yerevan’s decision to join the Customs Union and take part in establishing the Eurasian integration process caused discussion on importance of integration projects. Ahead of the G20 summit in St. Petersburg the dean of the World Politics Department of MSU, Andrey Kokoshin, told Vestnik Kavkaza about prospects of G20 and the Eurasian project.
- Can you estimate influence of the Eurasian project on Russia’s positions in the system of international relations?
- In the context of the huge changes which are happening in the balance of forces in the world, various integration projects play a very important role. The U.S. have two integration projects which are directed at balancing the growing importance of China. One project is Trans-Atlantic trade and investment partnership and another is the Trans-Pacific project. Obviously, Russia needs its own project. And it was initiated. The Eurasian project also relies on ideas of our partners, for example, the authorities of Kazakhstan, Nursultan Nazarbayev, our partners in Belarus, some other countries of the CIS.
Apparently a hard work should be made to implement it in the situation of possible appearance of new giant structures and other structures which can be competitors of the project.
However, interests of Russia and other countries of the post-Soviet area show that we should integrate, gain advantages of a large market, cancel customs obstacles, have deep industrial and economic integration, integration in the sphere of education and science.
- What do you expect from the G20 summit?
- I hope that the agreements which have been achieved by sherpas at the level of ministries of finances will be fulfilled and the summit will contribute to stabilization of the international financial and economic situation. The fact of the summit is already positive. It is very important to gain reduction of budget deficits, the state debt; and it is important that those countries who brought us to the crisis of 2008 would be responsible, starting from the U.S. By the way, a very important factor was irresponsible behaviour of the U.S. in the military sphere. Only wars in Iraq and Afghanistan cost $2 trillion and led to a significant growth of the state debt, budget deficit, which encouraged the crisis of 2008. Bush was reelected, but they led us to the crisis.
- Can Russia offer the world economy an alternative to oil and gas industry?
- I think it shouldn’t be an offer to the world economy, but implementation of our own plans. Putin suggested the program of new industrialization of Russia. It should be fulfilled, we should do our best, summon up intellectual resources, our businessmen and politicians, as many decisions should be purely political.
- In St. Petersburg the leaders of G20 will touch on the Syrian topic. What are prospects for settlement of the conflict?
- We should wait for official results of the work of the UN experts. Only a decision of the UN SC can be legitimate. All other things are beyond legitimacy and can destabilize the international situation.
- What are chances for the U.S. to strike on Syria without the UN approval?
- They can go against the UN’s will, as they have many times done this. Let’s remember Iraq when they ignored the SC, the position of France and Germany which judged the Iraqi war together with Russia.
However, it won’t be legitimate. The U.S. often stand for predominance of the international law, but in this case they actually break the law themselves.
