Greater Eurasia Research Articles

The Geographical Implications of the Creation of “Greater Eurasia”

The tendency for the progressive establishment a broad integration association of a continental scale, “Greater Eurasia”, on the basis of the Eurasian Economic Union and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization is highlighted. A common geographical feature of the countries involved in this partnership is revealed, i. e. the unique ultra–continental location of their remote landlocked territories at the world’s largest distance from economical sea routes and major world markets. An example of the countries of Central Asia, Russian Siberia and western regions of China shows the negative influence of the ultra–continentality factor manifesting itself primarily in increased transportation costs, which creates considerable barriers to economic growth and foreign trade activity. It is suggested that the accelerated creation of international transport corridors of both latitudinal and meridional orientation be regarded as a potential powerful means for closer economic consolidation and interdependent economic development of the remote inland territories of “Greater Eurasia”. The new development opportunities for Siberia opening up before Siberia with the establishment of “Greater Eurasia” are pointed out: access of the Siberian regions via the transport corridors to nearby inland markets, the creation of preconditions for a deeper onsite processing of Siberian raw materials by organizing final process stages and obtaining transportable products with high added value, and by overcoming the depressing effect of the ultra–continentality on economic growth through the construction of the transport corridor on the basis of the Trans–Siberian Railroad using advanced technological solutions.

Reenergizing the Russia‐ASEAN Relationship: The Eurasian Opportunity

While Russia’s policy in Southeast Asia (SEA) encounters serious deficiencies, in 2016, plans to raise the Russia‐ASEAN relationship to the level of strategic partnership were announced at the top level. The puzzle is how cooperation between Russia and ASEAN in Eurasia can lay the foundation for their strategic partnership. The article gives insights into Russia’s policy in SEA through the prism of ASEAN prospective plans, traces the increase in bilateral cooperation in Eurasia, and assesses the potential of the ASEAN‐SCO‐EAEU format and its implications for Russia’s policy in SEA. The authors argue that the Russia‐ASEAN strategic partnership will be premised upon their cooperation in Greater Eurasia, which will give a strong impetus to Russia’s policy in SEA. The article identifies the reasons behind premising the planned Russia‐ASEAN strategic partnership on Greater Eurasia’s foundation, the obstacles the parties will have to overcome, and the impact of this cooperation upon Russia‐ASEAN connectivity.

Greater Eurasia and Russian Foreign Policy Priorities

The strategic concept of the Greater Eurasian Partnership has been the greatest achievement of Russia in its prioritization of foreign policy and in building effective multilateral institutions in this macroregion. This concept, as well as the previously developed strategy of pairing the Chinese One Belt One Road Initiative and the Eurasian Economic Union, is based on the academic and political belief that multilateral institutions, which introduce mutually binding norms for their members, are the essential element of international regulation on both global and regional levels. For Russia, the idea of the Greater Eurasian Partnership is also a part of its national strategy and policy of the accelerated development of the Russian Far East and Siberia – both natural and necessary parts of Asian and Eurasian space. So far, Eurasia has primarily been a geostrategic and philosophical concept, whereas the new strategy of Russia aims to revalue Eurasia in terms of rational cooperation.

ОТНОШЕНИЯ МЕЖДУ ЕС И ЕАЭС В КОНТЕКСТЕ ОБЕСПЕЧЕНИЯ УСТОЙЧИВОГО ЭКОНОМИЧЕСКОГО РАЗВИТИЯ И РЕГИОНАЛЬНОЙ БЕЗОПАСНОСТИ В БОЛЬШОЙ ЕВРАЗИИ

ОТНОШЕНИЯ МЕЖДУ ЕС И ЕАЭС В КОНТЕКСТЕ ОБЕСПЕЧЕНИЯ УСТОЙЧИВОГО ЭКОНОМИЧЕСКОГО РАЗВИТИЯ И РЕГИОНАЛЬНОЙ БЕЗОПАСНОСТИ В БОЛЬШОЙ ЕВРАЗИИ

‘Greater Europe’ or ‘Greater Eurasia’? In search of new ideas for the Eurasian integration

The article considers the genesis of the idea of ‘Greater Eurasia’ which refers to the common humanitarian, economic, political and security space from Lisbon to Shanghai. In the first part of the article, the author focuses on the development of the idea of ‘Greater Europe’ and its historical background. The author notes that the idea of ‘Greater Eurasia’ was preceded by the idea of ‘Greater Europe’ as a project of integration or convergence of the leading European countries and Russia. In the second part of the article, the author considers possible ways and prospects for cooperation of the EU and the EAEU in the framework of the idea of ‘Greater Europe’. The article emphasizes that under the implementation of the project of the Eurasian Economic Union, the idea of ‘Greater Europe’ was associated not only with the interaction of the EU and Russia, but also of the EU and the EAEU. However, from the author’s point of view, today the idea of ‘Greater Europe’ from Lisbon to Vladivostok is losing its relevance due to China’s ‘Belt and Road’ Initiative. The author considers the perceptions of the ‘Belt and Road’ Initiative by the EU and the EAEU and concludes that the idea of ‘Greater Eurasia’ with the participation of the EU, the EAEU and China is a new geo-political phenomenon which will represent a common space between Europe, the EAEU states and Asia and in which Russia and other members of the EAEU can become a centre for integration of Asia and Europe. According to the author, this idea has a number of advantages as well as risks that are presented in the article.

ПРОЕКТ «ВЕЛИКА ЄВРАЗІЯ» В ГЕОСТРАТЕГІЇ РОСІЙСЬКОЇ ФЕДЕРАЦІЇ

Geostrategy of state involves in particular the projects of its activities concerning certain regions of the world, countries and territories. Contemporary geostrategy of Russia in the world is based on the conceptual basis of the formation of a multipolar order. In 2016, Russia initiated the creation of the “great Eurasian economic space”. The implementation of geoeconomic (and at the same time geopolitical) project of the “Greater Eurasia” is to ensure the interests of Russia and increase its positions in the continent. The project “Greater Eurasia” makes provisions for economic association of leading Asian countries like Russia, China, India, Pakistan, Iran, and many others. The Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) may become the main basis for the “Greater Eurasia”. China as a main powerful economic actor in the Eurasia implements the transregional project “One Belt, One Road” that will lead to a significant strengthening of its geopolitical influence in the continent. Russia has risk to become a dependent partner of China. It is assumed that geostrategy of Russia towards China provides geopolitical “balancing” of the latter by involving to the interaction of India, Iran and other countries. In geostrategy of Russia the project “Greater Eurasia” is associated with the further development of the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) in the post-Soviet space. Quite significant contradictions among the leading actors may prevent the realization of the project “Greater Eurasia”. Contemporary Russia has insufficient economic potential for implementation of its geostrategy in Eurasia.

РОЛЬ ЕВРАЗИЙСКОГО ЭКОНОМИЧЕСКОГО СОЮЗА В ФОРМИРОВАНИИ БОЛЬШОЙ ЕВРАЗИИ

The article considers the concept of “Great Eurasia” as a result of the synergy of economic integration, political cooperation and ensuring the security of Eurasian states through realization of the EAEU integration model, cooperation on SCO, development of the Chinese “One Belt, One Road” Initiative, as well as bilateral cooperation of states and companies. The authors analyze resource, economic and human potential of the EAEC countries, economic development of the association, strengths and weaknesses of the integration association, propose a new approach to the definition of vectors for the development of economic and energy integration amid the formation of a new economic reality. The article considers the current state of the largest Eurasian economies – China and India, structural problems and complexities that emerged as a result of the implementation of models for their economic development. The authors assess the main parameters of the “One Belt, One Road” Initiative, review new opportunities of its connection with the EAEC integration model and other international projects in “Great Eurasia” in relation to changes in mechanisms of international and energy cooperation on the continent.

Relations between the European Union and the Eurasian Economic Union in terms of sustainable economic development and regional security in Greater Eurasia

Relations between the European Union and the Eurasian Economic Union in terms of sustainable economic development and regional security in Greater Eurasia

Большая Евразия и Новый шелковый путь: проблемы и перспективы синергии

Большая Евразия и Новый шелковый путь: проблемы и перспективы синергии

The promising vectors in Greater Eurasia

The promising vectors in Greater Eurasia

Beyond the Involution of Europe? Monism and Relations with Russia. Part 1

The crisis in relations between Russia and the European Union (EU) is part of the broader breakdown of the post-Cold War security order. This essay focuses on structural interpretation and identifies four interlinked processes shaping the crisis: tension between the logic of the enlargement and transformation; a dynamic of involution and resistance; the problem of monism, whereby the expanding self is unable adequately to engage with the un-integrated other; and the recent emergence of ‘other Europes’ that may potentially overcome involution. The erosion of the Atlantic system provides an opportunity for delayed institutional and ideational innovation. Based on the methodology of classical realism and modern constructivist theories, the author analyzes how the lack of mutual understanding and mistakes in understanding the intentions and actions of Russia, on the one hand, and the West, on the other, led to deep structural and cognitive contradictions that managed to renew confrontation between the Euro-Atlantic bloc and Russia. The author comes to the conclusion that the impossibility of implementing the “Greater Europe” project with the participation of Russia led to a deepening of the contradictions between Russia and the West, and also forced Moscow to look for an alternative to European integration in the “Greater Eurasia” project. At the same time, the European Union also entered a crisis stage, as evidenced by Brexit.

Security Outline for the Greater Eurasian Partnership

Security Outline for the Greater Eurasian Partnership

Направления торгово-экономического сотрудничества и интеграции экономики Республики Таджикистан в Большое евразийское пространство

Направления торгово-экономического сотрудничества и интеграции экономики Республики Таджикистан в Большое евразийское пространство

IRAN IN SITUATION OF THE SANCTION REGIME TRANSFORMATION

After the after cancellation of the anti-Iranian sanctions by the international community on 15 July 2015 in Iran the new stage of development has begun.. In 2013, for the post of President of the Islamic Republic of Iran (IRI) was elected Hassan Rouhani. Essence launched under the slogan “economy of resistance” of the new economic policy of the IRI is to make full use of internal reserves of growth to intensive development of the real sector of the economy, national production, focusing on knowledgeintensive sectors and industries for deep processing of hydrocarbons and other natural raw materials export orientation. Thus, the policy of “resistance economy” aimed at creating in Iran independent of foreign supplies industries. To the fore in Iran, leaves a large-scale project activity designed to implement the principle of “constructive engagement”. Implemented and planned in Iran’s strategic projects are meant for the Iranian leadership in the region and the world. As has shown the conducted research, paramount value in modern conditions is gained by factors of continuity and deepening of trust, increase in level of the relations with neighbors that can be provided with means of joint participation in implementation of status Euroasian technological, infrastructureand trade projects. Such interaction may include, for example, joint participation in projects of the Great Silk Road, the formation of a belt of security and of dialogue in greater Eurasia, cooperation in the framework of the SCO, the EEU and other international organizations. Iran certainly has kept commitment to logic of implementation of the Pax Umma Islamica project, originally – in Southwest Asia, under its leadership. All foreign policy activity of IRI in the foreseeable future, including forming of new system of regional stability in the Middle East and the international cooperation will be subordinated to achievement of this purpose, finally. Tehran, as one might expect, will return to the traditional Iranian policy of balancing, this time between China and the United States. Therefore, the possible inclusion of Iran in the alternative projects of the Great Silk Road (South Korea – Northern Europe – South Africa).

From Eastward Pivot to Greater Eurasia

From Eastward Pivot to Greater Eurasia

The Greater Eurasian Partnership Project: Challenges and Opportunities

The Greater Eurasian Partnership Project: Challenges and Opportunities

«Great Eurasia»: interests and possibilities of Russia at interaction with China

The Author analyzes the regulatory structure proposed by the President Putin’s strategy of «Great Eurasia» in Russian official and economic policy frameworks and development programmes, Examines internal and external factors affecting the Eurasian Union, as a base for building relationships within the «Great Eurasia». The emphasis the author makes the EAEU’s interest in the development of economic relations with the countries of «Great Eurasia» with the use of the Union. He also analyzes the dynamics of the negotiation process for conclusion of trade and economic agreements between the EEC and China and the challenges and opportunities of member countries in economic relations with China. Considered the level of compatibility of the Eurasian Union and the initiative «One belt and one road». A separate part of the article devoted to economic cooperation of Russia and China and their possible interaction in the construction of the Grand Eurasia.

China-Pakistan Economic Corridor and Its Social Implication on Pakistan: How Will CPEC Boost Pakistan’s Infrastructures and Overcome the Challenges?

This paper discusses the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) long-term infrastructural project as a major part of the One Belt One Road (OBOR) the major global initiative by the Chinese government, scheduled to complete by 2030. CPEC is a joint project that Beijing and Islamabad agreed to finance through Chinese investments utilizing investment loans largely by Chinese financial institutions; nevertheless, Pakistan will also be responsible for investing approximately 15 billion dollars on its own in the process. While the project has been welcomed by Greater Eurasia (including Russia, Iran, and Central Asia) besides the United Kingdom and Western European countries, albeit vehement opposition by India. Paper elaborates upon the positive and negative elements that will likely impact the project progress, from internal political, economic dynamics of Pakistan and consequent security challenges to the related transit tariff issues, quality labor force supplies, just as well the inter-provincial competition between Baluchistan and KPK (Khyber Pukhtoon Khwa) besides the reaction of some South Asian countries, namely, India and Bangladesh. It highlights the opportunities, challenges and the impact that this mega project will likely have to the existing socioeconomic infrastructure, job opportunities, poverty level index, and regional peace and security.

Transregionalism: Underlying Concept of EAEU-ASEAN Cooperation and Greater Eurasian Partnership

Nowadays the EAEU seeks to integrate itself into the global economy as one of its regional economic centers. Developing ties with other regional integration groups corresponds the EAEU’s interests and facilitates the polycentric structure of the emerging world order. In this respect, in 2016 on the sidelines of the third Russia-ASEAN Summit Russian President Vladimir Putin proposed to develop stronger relations between the EAEU and ASEAN as well as to form a greater Eurasian partnership encompassing the EAEU, the SCO and ASEAN. While geographically vast, these projects lack conceptual underpinning. It is deemed that transregionalism – an international phenomenon which is insuffi ciently explored by both Western and Russian scholars, can provide a crucial theoretical foundation for these initiatives. The author compares the mechanisms which ASEAN employs to promote transregional cooperation with the EU, MERCOSUR and the GCC as well as within the frameworks of such dialogue platforms as ASEM and FEALAC. The author suggests that EAEU-ASEAN relations should be analyzed from the viewpoint of a classic transregionalism, while a greater Eurasian partnership seen as an example of a broader one. The results of the analysis are instrumental in laying out practical recommendations for the EAEU in carrying out its transregional agenda.

The New Role of Russia in the Greater Eurasia

Key ideas associated with Eurasianism were developed in the 19th century. The narrative of classical Eurasianism in the 1920s was developed to explain that Western civilisation was not superior to other civilisations. Eurasia is the middle continent between other parts of Europe and Asia. There are historical, geographical, and cultural impetuses here which push nations to different forms of association. However, the dissolution of the USSR gave birth to new ideologies and political theories of Eurasianism. The most positive one was extensively developed by the President of Kazakhstan Nursultan Nazarbaev. Today, we witness the fourth stage of the development of Eurasianism.