The Concept of Equal and Indivisible Security in Eurasia: A Theoretical Analysis

Abstract

Listen

Translate article

The article analyses the practical feasibility of building an architecture of equal and indivisible security in Eurasia and identifies the main factors obstructing the realisation of this goal. The analysis is based on the results of the All-Russian Winter Online School “International Conflicts and Global Security”, which was held from 4 to 6 February 2024 at the North-West Institute of Management – branch of the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration.Aim. To identify and summarise the empirical and theoretical limitations of the concept of indivisible security in the context of building an inclusive and sustainable security architecture in Eurasia.Methods. The methods of scientific discussion followed by theoretical analysis of the materials of the All-Russian Winter Online School “International Conflicts and Global Security” were applied.Results. In the course of the study it became possible to identify several promising directions of Russian scientific discussion on equal and indivisible security in Eurasia. First, the study of global factors, such as the dynamics and characteristics of contemporary international conflicts, as well as the role and impact of new technologies on society and interstate relations. Second, discussing the possibilities and prospects for Russia’s co-operation with the states of Eurasia and other continents within the framework of a more inclusive Greater Eurasian Partnership.Conclusions. The study shows that the formation of equal and indivisible security in Eurasia is hampered by a number of empirical and theoretical limitations. Empirical difficulties include the continuing growth of conflicts in the world, dynamic events, the absence of a world order, the prevalence of competing interests and fundamental differences between the approaches of European and Eurasian powers to building a new world order. A kind of “black swan” is digital technologies, which can both increase the efficiency of public administration and generate more rigid forms of social control and reproduce insecurity. The theoretical limitations include the contradiction between the universalist nature of the concept of indivisible security and the idea of its local application, i.e. in the Eurasian space. The state-centrism of the concept, as well as the difficulty of implementing indivisible security in the absence of “indivisible justice” in the relations of sovereign states are also significant difficulties. The authors of the article conclude that despite these shortcomings, this concept has practical potential and is one of the promising projects for building a new world order.