DOCSLIB.ORG

Russia and the Eurasian Economic Union: Between Bilateral and Multilateral Relations

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Russia and the Eurasian Economic Union: Between Bilateral and Multilateral Relations NO. 9 2018 PUBLISHED BY THE SWEDISH INSTITUTE OF INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS. WWW.UI.SE Russia and the Eurasian Economic Union: Between Bilateral and Multilateral Relations Irina Busygina & Mikhail Filippov The Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) in equal status for all members of the Union, was the first relatively successful attempt to when the other member states are much establish strong multilateral institutions for smaller and asymmetrically depend on post-Soviet regional integration. Officially, economic ties with Russia. Overall, it the Eurasian Economic Union was launched remains unclear why Russia has agreed to on 1 January, 2015 with the treaty signed on build a new strong multilateral institution in 29 May, 2014 by the leaders of Russia, the post-Soviet space, as arguably it could Kazakhstan and Belarus. In 2015, Armenia obtain better deals though bilateral bargains and Kyrgyzstan joined the Union. The with much weaker counterparts. EAEU was formed on the basis of the previously functioning Customs Union We argue that Russia, as a rising power and (2010) and the Common Economic Space the strongest in Eurasia, is likely to benefit (2012). The institutions of the EAEU more from bilateral bargains than from include the Eurasian Economic Commis- multilateral arrangements in the region. sion (EEC), a permanent supranational Successful bilateral cooperation body consisting of two representatives from (bargaining) with Russia is also the each member state, the Eurasian preferable choice for Russia’s counterparts Intergovernmental Council, consisting of in the post-Soviet space. The leaders of the prime ministers of member states, the other post-Soviet nations do not trust EAEU Supreme Council, consisting of the Moscow, and are reluctant to delegate heads of state, and the Court of Justice. national sovereignty to integration projects dominated by Russia. The specifics of the Experts see evidence of the Union’s success multilateral compromise adopted for the in the greater scope of supranationalism EAEU grant smaller member states an compared to all previous post-Soviet opportunity to be more successful in integration projects, and in the nature of the bilateral bargains with Russia. Overall, the Union’s multilateral institutions, which are choice of the Russian leadership to build a based on the formal recognition of the equal new strong institutional form of multilateral status of all members of the Union relations (in the form of the EAEU) reduces (Dragneva and Wolczuk 2017: 6–7; Russia’s relative power in the post-Soviet Popescu 2014: 11; Vinokurov 2017). In space. addition, the EAEU successfully negotiates free trade and economic agreements with After the Soviet Union’s collapse, the other countries, including China (Perovic “bilateralization of relations” was the core 2018). principle of Russian foreign policy towards the post-Soviet states and European The institutional design of the Union is neighbors. With the EAEU, the Kremlin has described as an outcome of a series of moved away from the strategy of unexpected compromises (e.g. Czerewacz- bilateralization, while being aware that such Filipowicz and Konopelko 2017). The a union is unlikely to promote Russian question then arises of why the Russian economic and political dominance in the leadership should be interested in expansion region, at least compared to what would be of the Union’s scope of supranationality and attainable through bilateral deals. The 2 creation of the Union was costly for Russia: however, all these projects have been in fact, the other members agreed to enter primarily focused on supporting bilateral the Union on condition of receiving relations between Russia and its substantial concessions from Russia. The counterparts. Overall, at least 29 regional maintenance of the Union requires Russia to organizations have been formed by the post- consent to more compromises and endless Soviet nations, and 14 of them were still economic subsidies. At the same time, the functioning as of 2015 (Gast 2017). post-Soviet countries with EAEU Practically all these projects shared one membership have gained opportunities to distinctive feature: they were centered act more independently from Russia and around Russia and thus provided a very even to “blackmail” Russia with the threat limited level of authority delegation to of leaving the Union. multilateral institutions (Gast 2017). Formal multilateral institutions served as a Why did Russia make such a facade that concealed the true basis of disadvantageous decision? In our view, it regional post-Soviet integration projects— was the Ukrainian crisis of spring 2014 that bilateral relations connecting each of the created incentives for the Russian member countries with Russia. leadership to accept the institutional compromises necessary to initiate the Interestingly, Russia did not even invest Eurasian Economic Union. After the much effort in maintaining this facade. The annexation of Crimea, Putin urgently Russian leadership has repeatedly declared needed another “success story” for the that it considers multilateral cooperation to domestic audience in the face of growing be unacceptably restrictive for Russia as a international isolation and a stagnating “Great Power.” For instance, then-minister economy. This gave the leaders of of defense Sergey Ivanov stated that Russia Kazakhstan and Belarus, the countries with did not want to be tied down in its relations the longest record of participation in with post-Soviet nations by multilateral Russia-centered integration projects in the arrangements (Nezavisimaya Gazeta on 7 post-Soviet space and the founding February, 2001, p. 5, as cited in Nygren members of the EAEU, a chance to exploit 2007: 29). The Strategy for Russia: Agenda the momentum of Russian weakness. Put for the President - 2000i asserted that simply, the Kremlin had to pay a Russian policy towards post-Soviet states considerable price for the opportunity to should be based “on bilateral relations with declare the quick success of the Eurasian a strong position on defending [Russian] Union—a project of significant value for national economic interests…” (Karaganov Russian domestic politics in 2014. et al., 2000: 99). Thus, bilateralism is much more compatible with Russia’s geopolitical Russia’s incentives for bilateral and ambitions than multilateralism. multilateral cooperation in the post- Soviet space Furthermore, the economic rationale for Russia to promote multilateral cooperation Numerous attempts to promote post-Soviet in Eurasia is also doubtful (Tarr 2012; integration have been launched since the Kassenova 2013; Aslund 2016).ii In fact, dissolution of the Soviet Union. In practice, there is no evidence that the EAEU could 3 enlarge Russia’s economic power. As September 2003, Putin and the leaders of Libman (2017: 88–89) argues, “The pooling Ukraine, Belarus, and Kazakhstan signed of economic resources through the EAEU the agreement to form a single economic hardly improves the economic potential of space. The agreement was ratified by all the Russian economy.” On the other hand, four countries in spring 2004. Duma Libman (2017) and Libman and Vinokurov elections were held on 7 December, 2003, (2018) provide evidence that “The EAEU is followed by the presidential elections in associated with an extensive redistribution March 2004. In October 2007, the post- mechanism in favor of smaller countries” Soviet leaders signed the Agreement (Libman 2017: 91) (emphasis added). Establishing an Integrated Customs According to Krickovic (2014: 505), Territory and Formation of a Customs “These states will undoubtedly play an Union. Legislative elections were held on 2 important role in the integration process and December, 2007. Russia will have to appeal to their interests and concerns.” The launching of the Eurasian Union project in fall 2011 was also part of electoral In Russia, foreign policy currently plays an campaigning. In September 2011, Vladimir important instrumental role: it is the main Putin announced that the incumbent tool for domestic consensus and President Medvedev would not run for re- mobilization (Busygina 2018), and so the election, allowing him (Putin) to again re-integration of the post-Soviet space was occupy presidential office. Two weeks and is an important element of Russian later, Putin declared that during his next domestic politics. According to Gleb term as president he would bring ex-Soviet Pavlovsky, a former adviser to Putin and states into a “Eurasian Union.” The leaders currently the head of a political think tank, of Belarus and Kazakhstan promptly voiced every Russian national election campaign their support for the Union; Russian media since 1996 has been accompanied by reported that leaders of some other post- declarations of intentions to significantly Soviet nations also expressed interest in the push forward the re-integration of the post- idea. One month later, on 18 November, Soviet space (cited in Halbach 2012). The 2011, the presidents of Belarus, electoral campaign promises were often Kazakhstan, and Russia signed a supplemented by specific steps aimed to declaration setting the target of establishing show voters yet another success of post- the “Eurasian Economic Union” by January Soviet re-integration. For instance, in 1996, 1, 2015. three months before the presidential elections in Russia, Boris Yeltsin and the In 2011, most experts did not expect the leaders of Belarus, Kazakhstan and the Eurasian Union project to result in any Kyrgyz Republic signed the
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Should Ukraine Aim to Join the EU's Customs Union?
    Understanding the EU’s Association Agreements and Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Areas with Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia Should Ukraine aim to join the EU’s customs union?1 Michael Emerson and Veronika Movchan 8 September 2017 1 This paper was prepared at the invitation of Rasmussen Global. Michael Emerson is Associate Senior Research Fellow at CEPS, Brussels. Veronika Movchan is Academic Director at the Institute for Economic Research and Policy Consulting, Kyiv. Available for free downloading at http://www.3dcftas.eu/ Research and policy advice project supported by the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida). Contents Executive summary .................................................................................................................... 1 1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 2 2. The customs union in economic theory and integration models ....................................... 3 3. Current political context for customs unions in the wider European and Eurasian space 5 4. More on economic and political costs and benefits for Ukraine ........................................ 7 5. The other DCFTA cases – Georgia and Moldova ............................................................... 10 6. Conclusions ....................................................................................................................... 11 List of Tables Table 1. Different stages of economic integration ...................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • How Regional Trade Agreements Deal with Disputes
    Staff Working Paper ERSD-2018-09 14 September 2018 ______________________________________________________________________ World Trade Organization Economic Research and Statistics Division ______________________________________________________________________ HOW REGIONAL TRADE AGREEMENTS DEAL WITH DISPUTES CONCERNING THEIR TBT PROVISIONS? Ana Cristina Molina and Vira Khoroshavina Manuscript date: 14 September 2018 ______________________________________________________________________________ Disclaimer: This is a working paper, and hence it represents research in progress. The opinions expressed in this paper are those of the authors. They are not intended to represent the positions or opinions of the WTO or its members and are without prejudice to members' rights and obligations under the WTO. Any errors are attributable to the authors. HOW REGIONAL TRADE AGREEMENTS DEAL WITH DISPUTES CONCERNING THEIR TBT PROVISIONS? Ana Cristina Molina and Vira Khoroshavina* This version: 14 September 2018 Abstract: This paper investigates how RTAs treat disputes concerning their TBT provisions, in particular whether they treat them differently from other types of dispute, and how they deal with any potential overlap with the WTO when the substantive obligations of the RTA and the WTO TBT Agreement are the same (or similar). Our analysis covers 260 RTAs, of which 200 include at least one provision on TBT. We find that in general disputes on TBT provisions arising under RTAs are not treated differently from other type of RTA disputes. Fifteen per cent of RTAs with TBT provisions include provisions that apply exclusively to the resolution of TBT disputes and do so in general to favour the WTO dispute settlement mechanism over that of the RTA; only in one RTA – NAFTA – do the parties provide under some conditions for the exclusive use of the RTA DSM for certain types of TBT disputes.
    [Show full text]
  • The Dynamic Gravity Dataset: Technical Documentation Update
    The Dynamic Gravity Dataset: Technical Documentation Update Note Version 2.00 Abstract This document provides an update to the technical documentation for the Dynamic Gravity dataset, describing changes from Version 1.00 to Version 2.00. For full descrip- tion of the contents and construction of the dataset, see full technical documentation for Version 1.00 on the dataset page at https://www.usitc.gov/data/gravity/dgd.htm. This documentation is the result of ongoing professional research of USITC Staff and is solely meant to represent the opinions and professional research of individual authors. It is not meant to represent in any way the views of the U.S. International Trade Commission or any of its individual Commissioners. It is circulated to promote the active exchange of ideas between USITC Staff and recognized experts outside the USITC, professional development of Office Staff and increase data transparency by encouraging outside professional critique of staff research. Please address all correspondence to [email protected]. 1 1 Introduction The Dynamic Gravity dataset contains a collection of variables describing aspects of countries and territories as well as the ways in which they relate to one-another. Each record in the dataset is defined by a pair of countries or territories and a year. The records themselves are composed of three basic types of variables: identifiers, unilateral character- istics, and bilateral characteristics. The updated dataset spans the years 1948{2019 and reflects the dynamic nature of the globe by following the ways in which countries have changed during that period. The resulting dataset covers 285 countries and territories, some of which exist in the dataset for only a subset of covered years.1 1.1 Contents of the Documentation The updated note begins with a description of main changes to the dataset from Version 1.00 to Version 2.00 in section 1.2 and a table of variables available in Version 1.00 and Version 2.00 of the dataset in section 1.3.
    [Show full text]
  • Eiropas Savienība Kā Tiesību Subjekts: Problēmas Un Risinājumi
    Renāte Fila EIROPAS SAVIENĪBA KĀ TIESĪBU SUBJEKTS: PROBLĒMAS UN RISINĀJUMI Promocijas darbs tiesību doktora zinātniskā grāda iegūšanai Specialitāte – juridiskās zinātnes Apakšnozare – starptautiskās tiesības Darba zinātniskais vadītājs: Dr. iur., asociētais profesors Jānis Grasis Promocijas darbs izstrādāts ar ESF līdzfinansēta projekta “Atbalsts doktorantiem studiju programmas apguvei un zinātniskā grāda ieguvei Rīgas Stradiņa universitātē”, vienošanās Nr.2009/0147/1DP/ 1.1.2.1.2/09/ IPIA/VIAA/009, atbalstu. Rīga, 2014 ANOTĀCIJA Promocijas darba mērķis ir izpētīt Eiropas Savienībā esošo starptautisko līgumattiecību administratīvi tiesiskos aspektus, kompleksi ar administratīvo tiesību avotu piemērošanas teorētisko un praktisko jautājumu izpēti, apzināt Eiropas Savienības jurisdikcijas apjomu, robežas un ar noteikto jurisdikciju saistītās problēmas un izstrādāt priekšlikumus, kas dotu iespēju precīzi norobežot valsts konstitūtiem piemītošās administratīvās tiesības no administratīvajām tiesībām, kuras starptautiskajās attiecībās pilnvarota īstenot starptautiska organizācija un tās konstitūti. Promocijas darbā ir ievads, piecas pamatdaļas, kuras ir sadalītās vairākās apakšnodaļās, secinājumi un priekšlikumi un izmantotās literatūras saraksts. Teorētisko un praktisko atziņu analīzes rezultāti ir atspoguļoti 8 (astoņos) attēlos. Darba ievadā tiek aplūkota pētāmās tēmas aktualitāte, tiek izskaidrots pētījuma mērķis, uzdevumi, pētījuma objekts un priekšmets, kā arī pētījumā izmantoto zinātnisko metožu pamatojums. Darba pirmo daļu veido administratīvi
    [Show full text]
  • Eurasian Union: the Real, the Imaginary and the Likely
    CHAILLOT PAPER Nº 132 — September 2014 Eurasian Union: the real, the imaginary and the likely BY Nicu Popescu Chaillot Papers European Union Institute for Security Studies EU Institute for Security Studies 100, avenue de Suffren 75015 Paris http://www.iss.europa.eu Director: Antonio Missiroli © EU Institute for Security Studies, 2014. Reproduction is authorised, provided the source is acknowledged, save where otherwise stated. ISBN: 978-92-9198-247-9 ISSN: 1683-4917 QN-AA-14-002-EN-N DOI : 10.2815/42011 Published by the EU Institute for Security Studies and printed in Condé-sur-Noireau (France) by Corlet Imprimeur. Graphic design by Metropolis, Lisbon. EURASIAN UNION: THE REAL, THE IMAGINARY AND THE LIKELY Nicu Popescu CHAILLOT PAPERS September 2014 132 The author Nicu Popescu, Ph.D, is a Senior Analyst at the EUISS where he deals with EU-Russia relations and the post-Soviet space. He is the author of EU Foreign Policy and Post-Soviet Conflicts: Stealth Intervention (Routledge, 2011) and a former advisor to the Moldovan Prime Minister. European Union Institute for Security Studies Paris Director: Antonio Missiroli © EU Institute for Security Studies, 2014. Reproduction is authorised, provided the source is acknowledged, save where otherwise stated. Contents Foreword 5 Antonio Missiroli Introduction 7 The real Eurasia 9 1 Decision-making 11 Economics 11 Political commitment 13 The Russian debate 14 Russkii Mir vs Eurasia? 17 The geopolitical Eurasia 19 2 Deepening vs widening 19 The current members 20 The future members 22 The Chinese neighbour
    [Show full text]
  • The Eurasian Union
    No. 51–52 17 June 2013 Abkhazia South Ossetia caucasus Adjara analytical digest Nagorno- Karabakh resourcesecurityinstitute.org www.laender-analysen.de www.css.ethz.ch/cad www.crrccenters.org THE SOUTH CAUCASUS BETWEEN THE EU AND THE EURASIAN UNION Special Editor: Iris Kempe ■■ The Eurasian Union and the European Union Redefining their Neighborhood: The Case of the South Caucasus 2 Iris Kempe, Berlin ■■ Is the South Caucasus a Region? 5 Temuri Yakobashvili, Tbilisi ■■ The Eurasian Union: An Experiment in Finding a Place in the New World 8 Fyodor Lukyanov, Moscow ■■ The Eurasian Union: A View from Armenia 11 Richard Giragosian, Yerevan ■■ Considering Accession to the Eurasian Economic Union: For Azerbaijan, Disadvantages Outweigh Advantages 14 Vugar Bayramov, Azerbaijan ■■ Azerbaijan and the Eurasian Union: Costs and Benefits 17 Anar Valiyev, Baku ■■ OPINION POLL Friends and Enemies. How the Population of the Three South Caucasus States Perceives Other Countries 20 ■■ CHRONICLE From 8 May to 24 June 2013 25 Institute for European, Russian, Research Centre Center Caucasus Research German Association for and Eurasian Studies for East European Studies for Security Studies The George Washington Resource Centers East European Studies University of Bremen ETH Zurich University The Caucasus Analytical Digest is supported by: CAUCASUS ANALYTICAL DIGEST No. 51–52, 17 June 2013 2 The Eurasian Union and the European Union Redefining their Neighborhood: The Case of the South Caucasus Iris Kempe, Berlin Abstract The European Union and the Eurasian Union both are having an impact on the future strategic development of Wider Europe. The three states of the South Caucasus are indicating low interest in joining the Eurasian Union, but at the same time it is not clear if the EU is able to offer a strategic alternative.
    [Show full text]
  • International Students' Scientific Conference
    International Students’ Scientific Conference Prospects for European Integration of the Southern Caucasus Tbilisi, October 25-26, 2014 International Students’ Scientific Conference Prospects for European Integration of the Southern Caucasus Tbilisi, October 25-26, 2014 ISSN – 1987 – 5703 UDC 330/34(479) (063) Tbilisi, 2014 ს-279 D-49 კრებული შედგენილია ”სამხრეთ კავკასიის ევროპულ სივრცეში ინტეგრაციის პერსპექტივები” დევიზით გამართულ მეექვსე სტუდენტთა საერთაშორისო სამეცნიერო კონფერენციაზე წარმოდგენილი საუკეთესო ნაშრომებით. The collection contains the best scientific works of the Internationals Students’ Scientific Conference “ The Pros- pects for European Integration of the Southern Caucasus’’. სარედაქციო საბჭო: პროფ. შალვა მაჭავარიანი (თავმჯდომარე), პროფ. გურამ ლეჟავა, პროფ. თეიმურაზ ხუციშვილი, პროფ. სერგი კაპანაძე, პროფ. ინდრეკ იაკობსონი, პროფ. გიორგი ღაღანიძე, პროფ. ტანელ კერიკმაე, თათია ღერკენაშვილი (მდივანი). Editing Board: Prof. Shalva Machavariani (head), Prof. Guram Lezhava, Prof. Teimuraz Khutsishvili, Prof. Sergi Kapanadze, Prof. Indrek Jakobson, Prof. Giorgi Gaganidze, Prof. Tanel Kerikmae, Tatia Gherkenashvili (secretary) გამომცემელი: კავკასიის უნივერსიტეტი, ფრიდრიხ ებერტის ფონდი, გამომცემლობა ”სი-ჯი-ეს”-თან თანამშრომლობით. Published by Caucasus University, Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, by the collaboartion with CSG. პროექტი განხორციელდა ფრიდრიხ ებერტის ფონდისა და ბავშვთა და ახალგაზრდობის განვითარების ფონდის ხელშეწყობით. პუბლიკაციაში წარმოდგენილია ავტორთა პირადი მოსაზრებები. დაუშვებელია ფრიდრიხ ებერტის ფონდის მიერ გამოცემული მასალების
    [Show full text]
  • 2 the Intellectual Origins of the Eurasian Union Project
    2 The Intellectual Origins of the Eurasian Union Project Stephen Blank The Eurasian Economic Union and its component Customs Union comprise Vladimir Putin’s “flagship” policies.1 But these organizations are merely the latest iteration of an increasingly crystallized Russian policy aspiration dating back to the collapse of the Soviet Union. As Jeffrey Mankoff recently observed, “In one form or another, re-integrating the states of the former Soviet Union has been on Russia’s agenda almost since the moment the Soviet Union col- lapsed.”2 Arguably, Russia has never reconciled itself to losing an empire. The reintegration program that is proceeding under Putin in fact began under Boris Yeltsin’s leadership, notwithstanding the fact that the Commonwealth of Inde- pendent States (CIS) was first thought of as “divorce court” for former Soviet Republics. Furthermore, these organizations are not the only elements of Putin’s reintegra- tion plan. The overall project has always had a military dimension, namely the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) that grew out of the 1992 Tashkent Collective Security Treaty (CST).3 And the leitmotif of all these plans has not just been economic or military integration, but equally crucially, the privileging of Russian sovereignty over that of CIS countries, a hallmark of neo-imperial and sphere of influence policies. Russian leaders do not refrain from admitting this openly. In August 2008, immediately after the war in 1 Iwona Wisniewska, Eurasian Integration: Russia’s Attempt at the Economic Unification of the Post-Soviet Area, OSW Studies: Centre for Eastern Studies, Warsaw, 2013. 2 Jeffrey Mankoff, Eurasian Integration: the Next Stage, Central Asia Policy Brief, Elliott School of International Affairs, George Washington University, 2013, p.
    [Show full text]
  • Strengthening Regional Cooperation and Integration in Asia
    CHAPTER 15 STRENGTHENING REGIONAL Cooperation AND Integration IN ASIA 15.1 Introduction Regional cooperation and integration (RCI) refers to policies and initiatives of countries in a region to engage in close economic cooperation and promote the integration of their economies, especially through trade and investment. RCI has played an important role in supporting Asian development over the past half century. It contributed to the region’s peace and stability, promoted intraregional trade and investment, and supported the provision of regional public goods— in particular, controlling transboundary environmental pollution (for example, in rivers and the haze), combating communicable disease, and preventing financial contagion. RCI in developing Asia has evolved significantly since World War II in terms of country coverage and the scope of cooperation. It was initially motivated by the need to ensure peace and security after years of war and conflict in the region, and to move beyond former colonial links. It was also influenced by the United Nations (UN), initially through the establishment of the Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East (ECAFE) in 1947. 470 | ASIA’S JOURNEY to ProspERITY—CHAPTER 15 Over time, RCI became homegrown and expanded to more areas, including research, education, and capacity development; development financing; trade and investment; money and finance; and responding to common regional challenges. The Asian Development Bank (ADB) continues to promote RCI across many subregions. This chapter discusses the institutional evolution of RCI in Asia and the Pacific. Section 15.2 looks at the key motivating factors. Section 15.3 traces the changing drivers that influenced RCI’s evolution in East Asia and Southeast Asia—the subregions that benefited most thus far from regional cooperation and market-driven integration.
    [Show full text]
  • Eurasian Economic Union (EEU)
    Briefing April 2017 Eurasian Economic Union The rocky road to integration SUMMARY Since the 1991 breakup of the Soviet Union, various attempts have been made to re- integrate the economies of its former republics. However, little progress was made until Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan launched a Customs Union in 2010. In 2015, this was upgraded to a Eurasian Economic Union (EEU). Modelled in part on the EU, this bloc aims to create an EU-style Eurasian internal market, with free movement of goods, services, persons and capital. So far, the EEU's performance has been poor. Trade has slumped; this has more to do with Russia's economic downturn than the effects of economic integration, but there are signs that the new bloc is favouring protectionism over openness to global trade, which in the long term could harm competitiveness. Especially following the showdown between the EU and Russia over Ukraine, the EEU is widely seen in the West as a geopolitical instrument to consolidate Russia's post- Soviet sphere of influence. Fear of Russian domination and trade disputes between EEU member states are hindering progress towards the EEU's economic objectives. However, prospects may improve when Russia comes out of recession. The EEU is developing relations with third countries, such as Vietnam, which in 2015 became the first to sign a free-trade agreement with the bloc. For its part, the EU has declined to recognise the EEU as a legitimate partner until Russia meets its commitments under the Minsk agreements to help end the conflict in eastern Ukraine.
    [Show full text]
  • TRANSNATIONAL REVIEW Rule Britannia? Miles Kitts and James Snell on the State of Britain Ahead of the UK General Election
    THE May 20151 TRANSNATIONAL REVIEW Rule Britannia? Miles Kitts and James Snell on the state of Britain ahead of the UK general election Australian Institute of International Affairs QLD 2 Contributors: Alphabetical order Harris Terrace 46 George St Brisbane Queensland 4000 Contact: GPO Box 1916 Brisbane Queensland 4001 E: [email protected]. au W: www.internationalaffairs.com.au © Australian Institute of International Affairs The Imperial War Museum in London (Credit: Les Haines) ) THE TRANSNATIONAL REVIEW | AUSTRALIAN INSTITUTE OF INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS CONTENTS Editorial, 4 BRITAIN’S SHADOW OF DECLINE Rule Britannia? Miles Kitts, 5 The Closing of the British Mind James Snell, 6 STATE OF THE CONTINENT Europe’s extremist ascendancy Laure Fournier, 7 Can the EU and Eurasian Economic Union be friends? Taru Leppanen, 8 AIIA Queensland Events Event report: The Evolution of Boko Haram Elliot Dolan-Evans, 9 Boko Haram - Beyond Nigeria Emily Lighezzolo, 10 BOOKS Australia and the Vietnam War Dr. Peter Edwards, reviewed by James Brown, 11 4 Editorial While Australia’s political class continue its descent deal being reached by June 30 hinges on the approval into petty animosity ahead of the unveiling of the of Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khameini. There’s federal budget, the Motherland goes to the polls to already clear ambiguitiy between the releasing of decide (or, judging by current polling, not decide) who details between Washington and Tehran, with Dr. Javid will goverrn Downing Street for the next five years. Zarif writing off Washington’s release as “spin” on With Labour and the Conservative Party neck and neck Twitter.
    [Show full text]
  • ITE EMC Regulations and Their Impact on the Ease of Doing Business
    Global Benchmark Report ITE Electromagnetic Compatibility (EMC) Regulations and their Impact on the Ease of Doing Business 2021 www.itic.org Table of Contents Executive Summary ......................................................................................................................................1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................3 The Importance of Electromagnetically Compatible Products .............................................................................. 4 Overview of the 2021 Scores ..........................................................................................................................6 A Closer Look .................................................................................................................................................8 Australia .............................................................................................................................................................. 8 Brazil .................................................................................................................................................................... 8 Canada................................................................................................................................................................. 9 China ................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]